VirtueOnline Digest, Vol 17, Issue 25

[virtueonli...@listserv.virtueonline.org]

=================================
VirtueOnline Weekly News Digest
http://www.VirtueOnline.org
=================================

Welcome to the VOL Weekly News Digest, an electronic communique of news about The Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion is brought to you by VirtueOnline (VOL), a non-profit news and information ministry to the Anglican Communion. Subscriptions are offered free of charge.

For questions about the digest, to subscribe or modify your subscription:
a. Visit: http://www.virtueonline.org/listserv.html, or
b. Email your request to: in...@virtueonline.org

VOL depends on its readers for financial support. Please consider a tax deductible donation. You can do so via check or credit card. http://www.virtueonline.org/support.html

VIRTUEONLINE
570 Twin Lakes Rd
P.O. Box 111
Shohola, PA 18458

http://www.virtueonline.org
http://www.facebook.com/virtueonline
http://twitter.com/VirtueOnline

THANK YOU FOR READING AND SUPPORTING VOL

--

P.S. Direct replies to this digest do NOT go to VOL staff. If you wish to comment on today's digest, please address your email to in...@virtueonline.org

Today's Topics:

1. Table of Contents (David Virtue)
2. VIEWPOINTS: July 7, 2017 (David Virtue)
3. AUSTRALIA: Anglican Primate Blasts Appearance of Sydney
Archbishop and Tasmania Bishop to GAFCON Consecration in U.S.
(David Virtue)
4. Australian Primate admonishes Archbishop Glenn Davies and
Bishop Richard Condie (David Virtue)
5. Lord Carey's forced resignation is an injustice: he, too, was
a victim of Peter Ball (David Virtue)
6. CofE General Sex Synod 2017: not one question about the
Persecuted Church (David Virtue)
7. UK: Why will this tormented sex abuse survivor be protesting
at General Synod in York this weekend? (David Virtue)
8. Child abuse in the Church of England: hypocrisy,
inconsistency and ongoing cover-up (David Virtue)
9. The Truth About the Transgender Movement (David Virtue)
10. Archbishops criticised for inviting proposer of Scottish
gay-marriage motion to York (David Virtue)
11. Bullied by Canterbury and the Church of England (David Virtue)
12. Will the Gay Rights Lobby Ban Bible Reading? (David Virtue)
13. PEACE: What does it Mean to be a Mature Christian Disciple? -
Ephesians 2:11-22 (David Virtue)


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

Message: 1
Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2017 15:54:36 -0400
From: David Virtue <da...@virtueonline.org>
To: "virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org"
<virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org>
Subject: Table of Contents
Message-ID:
<1499457276.1148378....@webmail.messagingengine.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

VirtueOnline Weekly News Digest - Desktop & Mobile Edition
www.virtueonline.org
July 7, 2017

*************************************
VIEWPOINTS
*************************************

1. Church of England Synod Will Focus on LGBTQ Sexualities * Lord Carey
Unfairly targeted...more
http://www.virtueonline.org/church-england-synod-will-focus-lgbtq-sexualities-lord-carey-unfairly-targeted-sexual-abuse-charges


*********************************************
GLOBAL ANGLICAN NEWS
*********************************************

2.AUSTRALIA: Anglican Primate Blasts Appearance of Sydney Archbishop and
Tasmania Bishop at GAFCON
http://www.virtueonline.org/australia-anglican-primate-blasts-appearance-sydney-archbishop-and-tasmania-bishop-gafcon

3.Australian Primate admonishes Archbishop Glenn Davies and Bishop
Richard Condie
http://www.virtueonline.org/australian-primate-admonishes-archbishop-glenn-davies-and-bishop-richard-condie


*********************************************
CHURCH OF ENGLAND NEWS
*********************************************

4.Lord Carey's forced resignation is an injustice: he, too, was a victim
of Peter Ball
http://www.virtueonline.org/lord-careys-forced-resignation-injustice-he-too-was-victim-peter-ball

5.CofE General Sex Synod 2017: not one question about the Persecuted
Church
http://www.virtueonline.org/cofe-general-sex-synod-2017-not-one-question-about-persecuted-church

6.UK: Why will this tormented sex abuse survivor be protesting at
General Synod...
http://www.virtueonline.org/uk-why-will-tormented-sex-abuse-survivor-be-protesting-general-synod-york-weekend

7.Child abuse in the Church of England: hypocrisy, inconsistency and
ongoing cover-up
http://www.virtueonline.org/child-abuse-church-england-hypocrisy-inconsistency-and-ongoing-cover


********************************
CULTURE WARS
********************************

8.The Truth About the Transgender Movement
http://www.virtueonline.org/truth-about-transgender-movement


********************************
AS EYE SEE IT
********************************

9.Archbishops criticised for inviting proposer of Scottish gay-marriage
motion to York
http://www.virtueonline.org/archbishops-criticised-inviting-proposer-scottish-gay-marriage-motion-york

10.Bullied by Canterbury and the Church of England
http://www.virtueonline.org/bullied-canterbury-and-church-england

11.Will the Gay Rights Lobby Ban Bible Reading
http://www.virtueonline.org/will-gay-rights-lobby-ban-bible-reading


*********************************
DEVOTIONAL
*********************************

12.PEACE: What does it Mean to be a Mature Christian Disciple? -
Ephesians 2:11-22
http://www.virtueonline.org/what-does-it-mean-be-mature-christian-disciple-0


END



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

Message: 2
Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2017 15:56:28 -0400
From: David Virtue <da...@virtueonline.org>
To: "virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org"
<virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org>
Subject: VIEWPOINTS: July 7, 2017
Message-ID:
<1499457388.1148578....@webmail.messagingengine.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

The purpose of gifts. Much misunderstanding surrounds the purpose for
which God distributes spiritual gifts in the church. Some speak of them
as 'love gifts', as if their main purpose is to enrich the recipient and
we are to use them for our own personal benefit. Others think of them as
'worship gifts', as if their main purpose is the worship of God and
their main sphere of operation is the conduct of public worship. But
Scripture asserts that they are 'service gifts', whose primary purpose
is to 'edify' or build up the church. --- John R.W. Stott

"On the other hand, there's the case to be made that it's irresponsible
in extreme to put a smartphone -- with all of its connectivity, with all
of its vulnerabilities, with all of its instant access -- into the hands
of those who are certainly by a parental responsibility to be guarded
from many of the very things that that iPhone makes instantaneously and
anonymously and privately accessible." --- Albert Mohler, Southern
Baptist Leader

No ungifted Christian. The fact that every Christian has a gift and
therefore a responsibility, and that no Christian is passed by and left
without endowment, is fundamental to the New Testament doctrine of the
church. --- John R.W. Stott

Dear Brothers and Sisters,
www.virtueonline.org
July 7, 2017

THE arrogance of Church of England leaders defies all belief. The notion
that if they repeat what the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Church of
Canada have done embracing pansexuality and homosexual marriage, that
somehow they will obtain a different outcome, is mind blowing.

The embrace of pansexuality by TEC has cost them millions of dollars in
lawsuits, lost over 1,000 priests, put five dioceses in contention with
more than 100,000 Episcopalians fleeing...all to allow Gene Robinson to
wear a miter.
The CofE thinks that because they are the Mother Church they can get
away with it, and can therefore lecture Africans, Asians and anybody who
opposes them, is smug, hubristic and displays a superciliousness and
haughtiness with no parallel. Their ecclesiastical colonial days are
over, well and truly. The African Anglican Churches rule not the Church
of England. The chairman of GAFCON, Nigerian Primate Nicholas Okoh, has
a bigger following than Justin Welby; furthermore, he is more respected
than Welby, and he will summon more representative Anglicans to GAFCON
II next year in Jerusalem than Welby's Lambeth Conference in 2020.

Of course, Welby continues to argue that the C of E and the Church of
Wales explicitly ban same-sex marriage, but a number of dioceses and
their bishops have approved (in the name of pastoral discretion)
informal prayers for couples at their request. It's a smoke screen. The
ban is ecclesiastical, not ontological.

It is the thin end of the wedge and next week when Synod meets, of the
85 listed Synod questions, not one -- not one -- is concerned with the
plight of the persecuted church worldwide, noted one blogger. Nothing
about the murderous activities of Boko Haran than has seen the slaughter
of hundreds of Anglicans and the elimination of at least one diocese in
Nigeria. However, there are questions about sex, sexuality, sex, LGBT,
sex, LGTBQIA (what?), sex, LGBTI, sex, same-sex marriage, sex, 'gay
cure' conversion therapy, sex, sex, and sex. O, there's a question on
'Monitoring air quality', too. That's diversity of obsession. As the
blogger noted, "Welcome to the General Sex Synod of the Church of
England."

He is absolutely right. This is now the acceptable gaystapo approach to
homosexuality...keep pushing and pushing and pushing till the other side
caves in. We saw this in TEC and the ACoC and we are seeing it in the C
of E. Neither Welby nor most evangelicals seem willing to push back hard
enough (or at all) to stop this sodomite steamroller. They confuse or
conflate preaching and proclaiming the Word with declaring and defending
the Word against heresies, in the vain hope that if they are just nice
and tolerant, adopting a live and let live approach then all will be
well.

It is not going to happen, and it is why GAFCON exists and why Dr. Peter
Jensen, Archbishop Okoh and others are pushing back even if CofE
evangelicals seem lukewarm about it all.

However, one group of the General Synod's laity and clergy are pushing
back, and have said that an invitation to Bishop John Armes, the
proposer of a motion to amend the Scottish Episcopal Church's Canon 31,
on holy matrimony, to attend the CofE synod, places them in an
"invidious" position, and they wrote a letter to to the Church Times and
said they will have to consider whether to "follow our consciences and
withdraw".

The thin end of the wedge got a bit thicker.

>From the behavior that should not even be named, to full acceptance and
then jail for those who oppose the homosexual zeitgeist is the
trajectory. England is only months behind the US on this. Welby it seems
is ready to embrace homosexuality in the name of "radical inclusion"
(stolen from the TEC playbook).

With the slow creep of full acceptance clearly on its way, the door
having been opened fully by the Scottish Episcopal Church which has
fully embraced homosexual marriage, the next push by the LGBTQI crowd is
the CofE itself, led by people like Jayne Ozanne, a vociferous lay
lesbian.

Just how vociferous are the opposition voices? One conservative
commentator is saying that sexuality is a "salvation issue" and
revisionist voices should be "excommunicated". However, a progressive
bishop implied a comparison between his fellow bishops and the high
priest who handed over Jesus to be crucified.

"This is serious stuff -- even though the vast majority of synod members
and those in the pews on a Sunday morning would not care to speak about
each other in this way," wrote a blogger.

What, then, is the way forward? Short of a miracle, there is no obvious
practical answer. The Archbishop of Canterbury's statement following the
synod vote gave some hints. "To find ways forward, we need a radical new
Christian inclusion in the Church," he said. "This must be founded in
Scripture, in reason, in tradition, in theology; it must be based on
good, healthy, flourishing relationships, and in a proper 21st-century
understanding of being human and of being sexual."

Of course, Scripture is absolutely clear that homosexual relationships
have never been approved and churches which embrace it will never
flourish, because such behaviors (LGBTQI) have never been approved of by
God...and never will be. It is both a fiction and a lie to say
otherwise.

Here is what one blogger concluded: "At the same time, while the
sexualization of the clerical life of the Church moves forward at pace,
one can only wonder how in heaven it is to be expected that mere
bureaucratic procedures are supposed to keep vulnerable children and
adults safe from a carnal Church which in its heart seems more engaged
in the pursuit of worldly power and political influence, than upholding
unpalatable biblical truths and unappealing standards of ethics and
Christian living." Indeed.

You can read a number of stories and commentaries on this in today's
digest, including one by VOL's own commentator, Dr. Bruce Atkinson, on
the bullying behavior of the Church of England.

*****

The saga of former Archbishop George Carey and his failure to expose the
abuser of children continues, but there's pushback from some quarters
for the harsh treatment he has been getting at the hands of Justin
Welby, the present Cantuar.

Carey is now being seen as the victim. Lord Carey's forced resignation
is an injustice: he, too, was a victim of Bishop Peter Ball, writes
Martin Sewell, a retired Child Protection Lawyer and a member of General
Synod. He advances a plausible defense of Lord Carey.

If one reads the Gibb Report, with the child abuse story organized and
catalogued in a single document, Lord Carey's serious errors and
misjudgments are obvious, especially through the lenses of our modern
understandings of abuse, writes Sewell.

The other truth is that a lot of the safeguarding talk now in place was
not in place when Carey was in office.

But what of Welby's own inadequacies in this area. He ignored 12 letters
sent to him by a man who later became a priest, who said he was raped by
a priest who later committed suicide!

You can read a number of stories about all this in today's digest.

*****

PUSHBACK on the consecration of Canon Andy Lines of the UK by some 50
Global Anglican archbishops and bishops at the ACNA's recent Assembly in
Wheaton, Ill. is heating up. The primate of Australia, Phillip Freier,
publicly admonished Archbishop Glenn Davies of Sydney and Bishop Richard
Condie of Tasmania (he omitted or overlooked the Bishop of North West
Australia, Gary Nelson) for participating in the consecration and hinted
at some sort of disciplinary action, but didn't say what.

Well, the Anglican Church League (of Australia) pushed back on the
Primate and said that while an Australian Primate is always free to give
advice within the bonds of Christian fellowship, there is no
constitutional provision for formal advice, nor is there any sense of
hierarchy in the position of the Australian primate in relation to the
other 22 diocesan bishops. No Australian diocesan bishop is obligated to
follow the 'advice' of a primate.

"The Primate appeals to the Fundamental Declarations which are the
bedrock statements of belief in the Anglican Church of Australia. The
Scriptures are the ultimate rule and standard of faith; the commands of
Christ are to be obeyed and his doctrine taught, but no conclusion is
drawn by the Primate from this reference. The obvious conclusion to draw
is that the Scottish Episcopal Church, by virtue of its recent decision
to amend the definition of marriage and allow same-sex couples to be
married in its churches, has moved away from the commands of Christ and
his doctrine and the Scriptures as the ultimate rule and standard of
faith."

They said it was hypocritical of the archbishop to condemn the
appearance of the three bishops in Wheaton, Illinois, but not to rebuke
(by saying absolutely nothing) about the actions of the Scottish
Episcopal Church in voting for same sex marriage!

Consistency is clearly the hobgoblin of small minds.

You can read more about this in today's digest.

*****

The 34th annual British Social Attitudes Survey has shown that
non-religious people represent a clear majority of British people in
2017, accounting for 53% of the population. This is a new high for the
non-religious population, which was previously estimated at 51% in 2014.

That isn't particularly surprising, since a similar poll in 2002 found
that 50% of Anglican clergy are also non-religious insofar as they don't
believe in the Virgin Birth or that Jesus is the only way to be saved.
If Church of England clergy work really hard, I imagine they will be
able to talk the remaining 47% of Britons out of their faith, too, wrote
Samizdat of Canada.

A third of Church of England clergy doubt or disbelieve in the physical
Resurrection and only half are convinced of the truth of the Virgin
birth, according to a new survey.

The poll of nearly 2,000 of the Church's 10,000 clergy also found that
only half believe that faith in Christ is the only route to salvation.

So think about it. The CofE wants to accommodate sodomy, which will not
fill churches, while some of its clergy can't even affirm basic church
doctrines! Is it any wonder that only 1% of Brits go to church? Why
should they when many clergy don't believe their own beliefs.

*****

The disappearing diocese of Huron. The diocese closed two more churches
this week and three more will close. The Ven. Nancy Adams de-consecrated
the churches at special services and said more would be coming. "There
is no benefit or consolation to be found in pointing fingers or trying
to assign blame for this new institutional reality through which the
Church is passing," she wailed. Of course not, why should one dare to
say that if you have no message more cogent than teenage twitter about
Justin Bieber (who might be better known than Jesus Christ by a younger
generation), why bother with a church that won't tell you why it should
exist!
The diocese of Huron is planning to build a funeral home, with a chapel,
visitation rooms and reception area, at Woodland Cemetery on Springbank
Drive. Appropriate we think.

A source told VOL that St. Albans Church in London, Ontario, is also
closing, as is a church in Pond Mills in London, Ont. All the while, the
Anglican Church of Canada keeps talking about "fresh expressions"
(whatever that means) and rails on about climate change.

*****

Some good news. Two Christian street preachers have been found not
guilty of inciting public disorder at Bristol Crown Court. In February,
Michael Stockwell and Michael Overd were convicted at Bristol
Magistrates Court of an offence under the Crime and Disorder Act, after
police claimed that the crowd around them became disorderly as a result
of their preaching. They appealed to the Crown Court and, after a 3-day
hearing, on Friday were found not guilty of religiously aggravated
harassment, according to the Barnabas Fund.

Barnabas Fund provided an expert witness, who demonstrated that the
content of their preaching was largely quotations from the King James
Bible (the "Authorized Version"). However, at their trial in February,
the lawyer for the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) claimed that this was
irrelevant, arguing that publicly quoting from the King James Bible in
modern Britain should "be considered to be abusive and is a criminal
matter".

Serious questions must now be asked about the conduct of both Avon and
Somerset Police, who arrested the preachers, and the CPS. Barnabas Fund
has seen the official transcript of the video recording that the two men
made of their preaching. The preachers were clearly attracting a crowd
of disorderly hecklers who were swearing at and abusing them. Yet none
of the hecklers were arrested -- only the street preachers, who, whilst
robust in stating the Biblical teaching, were respectful towards those
asking questions.

However, even if people express their ideas very strongly, or even
offensively, they are still entitled to freedom of speech. Not all
Christians will be comfortable with the style of the men's preaching.
However, if those people are silenced, the next to be silenced will be
people saying the same things in a gentler way.

It is also clear from the transcript of the preaching that much of the
heckling centered on questions about Islam, and the question must be
asked as to whether some hecklers were deliberately seeking to set them
up. If so, then what the police have effectively done by arresting the
preachers, is to enforce the Islamist agenda of prohibiting any
criticism of Islam.

The actions of the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) must also come under
scrutiny. If the CPS felt that the manner in which the men were
delivering their preaching was causing a disturbance, such as by being
too loud, then they could have prosecuted them under nuisance laws.
Instead, they chose to prosecute them for the content of their
preaching. Consequently, as the preachers' defense solicitor Michael
Phillips commented in February, the case had become in effect a "modern
day heresy trial".

This is a very important verdict. Had the men been convicted and
subsequent appeals turned down, it risked setting a legal precedent
which would have introduced a form of censorship on the public reading
of the Bible -- which is what the CPS lawyer argued the court should
rule. Clearly the CPS has very serious questions to answer.

*****

For a truly definitive reading on the whole issue of Transgenderism, I
have posted a major piece by Dr. David Kyle Foster on the subject. You
can read it here or in today's digest.
http://www.virtueonline.org/truth-about-transgender-movement

*****

Please offer a helping hand to keep us afloat. The summer months are low
on income and we do need funds to continue.

Please consider making a tax-deductible contribution through PAYPAL at
the link here: http://www.virtueonline.org/support-vol/

Or you can send a snail mail check to:

VIRTUEONLINE
570 Twin Lakes Rd
P.O. Box 111
Shohola, PA 18458

In Christ,

David



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

Message: 3
Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2017 15:57:12 -0400
From: David Virtue <da...@virtueonline.org>
To: "virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org"
<virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org>
Subject: AUSTRALIA: Anglican Primate Blasts Appearance of Sydney
Archbishop and Tasmania Bishop to GAFCON Consecration in U.S.
Message-ID:
<1499457432.1148640....@webmail.messagingengine.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

AUSTRALIA: Anglican Primate Blasts Appearance of Sydney Archbishop and
Tasmania Bishop to GAFCON Consecration in U.S.
Letter to bishops of Anglican Church of Australia threatens possible
canonical action against two leaders

By David W. Virtue in Europe
www.virtueonline.org
July 2, 2017

The Primate of the Anglican Church of Australia, The Most Rev. Dr.
Philip L. Freier, has written a scathing letter to his fellow bishops
condemning, in the strongest possible language, the appearance of an
archbishop and bishop from his province at the consecration of Bishop
Andy Lines, a Missionary Bishop to Scotland and Europe, by a score of
Global South primates in Wheaton, Illinois, recently.

Freier, who is also the Archbishop of Melbourne, said he had received
correspondence from Archbishop Glenn Davies (Sydney) and Bishop Richard
Condie (Tasmania) advising him of their intention to participate in the
consecration of a bishop for Europe, at the Anglican Church in North
America (ACNA), Assembly, a church, he said that is not a member of the
Anglican Communion, is not in fellowship with the Archbishop of
Canterbury and is not in communion with the Anglican Church of
Australia.

"I have deep concerns that the participation by our Episcopal colleagues
in the consecration of Canon Lines, with or without the support of their
respective dioceses, is contrary to the spirit of the canons of the
Council of Nicaea and, most importantly, outside of the authority of our
National Constitution. It may also be outside the authority of the
Consecration of Bishops Canon, 1966 of the Anglican Church of
Australia."

The two bishops had written what they called a letter of "conscience",
declaring that their intended participation to be an act of solidarity
"with those who will act to protect the gospel of Christ" or "who
contend for the faith once for all delivered to the saints" -- an issue
as to the Fundamental Declarations and Ruling Principles of our National
Constitution (ss 1- 6).

Freier said he had advised both bishops against this course of action,
arguing that communion -- koinonia - is a gift of our Lord to his Church
and that in our context it is the Anglican Church of Australia, through
its constitution and the framework it establishes, that determines how
this is expressed in practical terms.

"I do not think that it is for us individually, acting independently, to
determine with whom we are in communion or to act unilaterally to that
end. I do not think that it is for individual dioceses in the Anglican
Church of Australia to determine with whom we, as members of that
Church, are in communion. We must act in accordance with the
Constitution that binds us as the Anglican Church of Australia."

Freier argued that the consecration of Canon Lines and the participation
of these two men raised significant questions how the close fellowship,
co-operation and collegiality of the Communion is now being affected.

On 8 June 2017, the Synod of the Scottish Episcopal Church, a member of
the Anglican Communion, voted on same sex marriage. That day the ACNA
announced their decision to proceed with the consecration of Canon Andy
Lines "to serve clergy and congregations who are outside other Anglican
structures in Europe, providing an opportunity for ordination and
oversight from a perspective of Biblical orthodoxy." Neither the
Archbishop of Canterbury (who has responsibility for Europe) nor the
Primus of the Scottish Episcopal Church has given their concurrence to
the consecration or the proposed Episcopal ministry.

Freier said the two men sought his advice, but they both rejected it.

"The consecration in the ACNA is not on any view an act in communion
with the Anglican Communion and its member churches, particularly the
Provinces of the Church of England, the Scottish Episcopal Church and
existing jurisdictions in Europe.

"Whilst any individual and any diocese may form a view as to whether
continued communion is consistent with the Fundamental Declarations, it
is for the General Synod of our Church alone to determine such a
question."

Freier said canon 1966 on the Consecration of Bishops mandates the
manner of the consecration of bishops, binding all the bishops in the
Church [of Australia], providing expressly for a bishop to serve in the
Anglican Church Australia, thus excluding a bishop like Lines, who is
not recognized by the Australian Synod and the Archbishop of Canterbury.

The consecrating bishops from the mostly Global South, at the ACNA
ordination, said their action was necessary to preserve and foster the
proclamation of the gospel of Jesus Christ that was being jeopardized by
"another gospel" being proclaimed by many parts of the Anglican
Communion.

FOOTNOTE: VOL has been informed that Bishop Gary Nelson of Western
Australian was also present.

Bishop Condie of Tasmania issued the following statement which you can
see here: https://youtu.be/z5eYDAbw3O0
Archbishop Glenn Davies of Sydney issued this statement:
https://youtu.be/MQuvnea-_CU



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

Message: 4
Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2017 15:57:41 -0400
From: David Virtue <da...@virtueonline.org>
To: "virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org"
<virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org>
Subject: Australian Primate admonishes Archbishop Glenn Davies and
Bishop Richard Condie
Message-ID:
<1499457461.1148688....@webmail.messagingengine.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Australian Primate admonishes Archbishop Glenn Davies and Bishop Richard
Condie

By Andrew Bruce
http://acl.asn.au/primate-admonishes-abp-davies-and-bp-condie-acl-response/
July 5, 2017

The following statement was issued by Anglican Church League

In an earlier post http://tinyurl.com/y9ozbgvz (29 June) I wrote that
the Council of the Anglican Church League wholeheartedly supported the
consecration of Canon Andy Lines, by GAFCON Bishops and our own
Archbishop, Dr Glenn Davies, the Bishop of Tasmania, Dr Richard Condie
and the Bishop of North West Australia, Gary Nelson, to 'provide
biblical faithful oversight for those European parishes that have been
abandoned at this time'.

Now, in response to the letters sent to Australian bishops by Davies and
Condie (see the links below for the full texts), the Primate, Archbishop
Philip Freier has issued his own letter of 1 July admonishing Davies and
Condie. A link to the Primate's letter follows this post.

The Primate builds his case on constraints in the Australian Anglican
constitutional arrangements and the 'close fellowship, co-operation and
collegiality of the Communion'.

As to constraints in the constitution, the Primate 'advised both bishops
against this course of action'. While an Australian Primate is always
free to give advice within the bonds of Christian fellowship, there is
no constitutional provision for formal advice, nor is there any sense of
hierarchy in the position of the Australian primate in relation to the
other 22 diocesan bishops. No Australian diocesan bishop is obligated to
follow the 'advice' of a primate.

The Primate appeals to the Fundamental Declarations which are the
bedrock statements of belief in the Anglican Church of Australia. The
Scriptures are the ultimate rule and standard of faith; the commands of
Christ are to be obeyed and his doctrine taught, but no conclusion is
drawn by the Primate from this reference. The obvious conclusion to draw
is that the Scottish Episcopal Church, by virtue of its recent decision
to amend the definition of marriage and allow same-sex couples to be
married in its churches, has moved away from the commands of Christ and
his doctrine and the Scriptures as the ultimate rule and standard of
faith.

The Primate also appeals to 'the plenary authority of General Synod in
this matter. Section 26 of the Constitution provides... Synod may make
canons rules and resolutions relating to the order and good government
of this Church including canons in respect of ritual, ceremonial and
discipline'. However, quoting this section only gives one side of the
picture. The other side of the picture is the restricting qualification
to this power. Section 30(a) provides that canons 'in respect of ritual,
ceremonial and discipline' only take effect in a diocese when adopted by
ordinance of that diocese. This is the clear and plain constitutional
arrangement in the Australian Church. Each diocese has the final say,
not the General Synod. So, 'plenary authority' is not so plenary.
Further, a diocese has power to exclude canons adopted previously.
As to 'close fellowship, co-operation and collegiality of the Communion'
this was on magnificent display at the consecration of Andy Lines. The
Gafcon Primates and other diocesan bishops at the consecration represent
some 75% of Anglicans world-wide. More than 50 bishops took part in the
consecration. That three Australian diocesan bishops participated is a
wonderful expression of the 'collegiality of the Communion'.

But why does the Primate's letter not include any rebuke to the 'Synod
of the Scottish Episcopal Church, a member of the Anglican Communion'
for voting for same sex marriage? Abandoning the teaching of Scripture
on the issue is surely sufficient grounds for such a rebuke. The Primate
chose instead to suggest 'Each Church makes its own decisions in its own
ways, guided by recommendations from the Lambeth Conference...' However,
even just on these terms a rebuke was warranted since, plainly, the
Synod of the Scottish Episcopal Church has rejected the guidance of the
Lambeth Resolution 1.10 of 1998. In part that resolution says:

(b) in view of the teaching of Scripture, upholds faithfulness in
marriage between a man and a woman in lifelong union, and believes that
abstinence is right for those who are not called to marriage;
(e) cannot advise the legitimising or blessing of same sex unions nor
ordaining those involved in same gender unions.

Even if Lambeth too is put to one side, our own General Synod in 2004
resolved (62/04 and 63/04) that it did not condone the liturgical
blessing of same sex relations or the ordination of people in open same
sex relationships. This should have been enough to ground some criticism
of the Scottish Episcopal Church decision.

The Primate says, 'I do not think that it is for us individually, acting
independently, to determine with whom we are in communion or to act
unilaterally to that end'. Whether or not there is such a principle, the
ordination of women in the Australian Church means there now exists a
state of impaired communion between diocesans bishops and dioceses on
recognition of the orders of some priests and bishops. Bishops have
acted independently on this issue. The resulting impaired communion will
become even more stark if an Australian diocesan synod decides to
approve same sex relationships.
The Primate's letter raises more questions than it answers, in
particular, concerning the bonds that bind us as fellow Anglicans.

For and on behalf of the Anglican Church League Council.

Andrew Bruce is President of the Anglican Church League



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

Message: 5
Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2017 15:58:14 -0400
From: David Virtue <da...@virtueonline.org>
To: "virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org"
<virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org>
Subject: Lord Carey's forced resignation is an injustice: he, too, was
a victim of Peter Ball
Message-ID:
<1499457494.1148733....@webmail.messagingengine.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Lord Carey's forced resignation is an injustice: he, too, was a victim
of Peter Ball

By Martin Sewell
http://archbishopcranmer.com/lord-carey-forced-resignation-injustice-victim-peter-ball/
July 4, 2017

This is a guest post by Martin Sewell, a retired Child Protection Lawyer
and a member of General Synod. He considers here the wiles and
manipulations of child-abuser Peter Ball, and advances a plausible
defence of former Archbishop George, now Lord Carey.

If one reads the Gibb Report, with the child abuse story organised and
catalogued in a single document, Lord Carey's serious errors and
misjudgements are obvious, especially through the lenses of our modern
understandings of abuse. Life is experienced in a much more haphazard
and diffuse way, however, and the story evolved over a lengthy period.
For substantial periods the name of Peter Ball fell off the agenda, and
when he returned it is of the nature of everyday life that it was not
always the case that 'joined-up thinking' resumed.

We also need to recall that Peter Ball operated in a period when it was
seriously advanced on behalf of abusers of children that 'all children
lie', that they did so for trivial advantage, and quite seriously by
some psychiatrists, that all little girls fantasise about having sex
with their fathers. These were times of a very different mindset, and
Ball lived and operated in a church which simultaneously condemned gay
orientation and acts, yet comprised of men like George Carey who felt
compassion for their plight and vulnerability.

Like Jimmy Savile, Ball's professional reputation and successes within
the Church conferred upon him a degree of untouchability which he knew,
understood, and exploited. Like Savile, Ball worked within a large
institution where many developed collective amnesia, willing to
acknowledge 'rumours' but without a sufficient structurally rigorous
safeguarding regime to collect all the evidence and force the key
question to be asked: 'What does all this mean?'

The comparison with Savile needs to go a stage further.

Both he and Ball were able, by force of personality, to only to dominate
their victims initially, but to hold them, isolate them and silence them
beyond the time of direct influence. For many, it was only upon Savile's
death that the spell was broken and they were finally able to tell those
closest to them what had happened. We rarely speak of the power of evil
in the modern world, but even the sceptical secularist struggles to
explain such a phenomenon in any other way.

If you have never encountered such glib, plausible, manipulative
abusers, it is almost impossible to fully grasp the way in which they
successfully operate. It was especially rare for their brand of
charismatic evil to be appreciated in the public sphere during the
period when Ball was working on Carey.

The first point of defence is to note not simply how naive Carey was,
but how many people were taken in -- not only by Carey, but Ball's own
bishop brother who joined his brother to re-write the narrative. Carey
had two of them working on him over a prolonged period of time
exploiting an innate Christian kindness.

It was not only the Archbishop but nine further bishops who were
ensnared, and countless others. Carey was being pressurised without
independent advisors cataloguing the story, keeping him on the straight
and narrow. The closer you let Peter Ball get to you, the less chance
you had of seeing him for what he was. It is striking that it is mainly
the remoter figures in the story, such as Deacon K, who actually got his
measure at the time. Peter Ball's brother defended him from first to
last.

Even some of Ball's victims spoke of the 'spiritual benefits' they
experienced from his methods of distorting and corrupting spiritual
exercise into abuse. He fooled a Lord of Appeal -- Lord Lloyd -- one of
the most astute judges of his day, together with countless school
headmasters, members of the gentry, and possibly members of the Royal
Family. He persuaded a diocesan registrar to imprudently interpret the
rule against conflict of interest in order to represent him in a
personal capacity whilst simultaneously advising the church. These are
not naive people, but all succumbed in various ways alongside George
Carey.

If you want a model for Carey's ensnarement, think of the abused wife
who is always making excuses for her abuser, or even Esther Rantzen, who
was simultaneously setting up Childline and suppressing her doubts about
Jimmy Savile as all the rumours reconfirmed everything she 'heard' but
did not 'know'. Even now she honestly struggles to explain it. We used
to convict wives who stabbed their abusive husbands because we reasoned
that they could always walk away rather than resort to murder. Now we
have a better understanding of the corrosive power of the emotional
entrapment exercised by the manipulative abuser.

Once having 'got' Carey, Ball would have regarded him as a prize asset
and not let him go.

There are two striking parts of the story that resonate from my own
experience of such abusers.

First, Ball accepts a caution of gross indecency with a 17-year-old boy.
That was plainly an offence at the time. Later he presents it as
accepting a caution involving a 19-year-old, which would not have been a
crime against a minor. That is clever and subtle. It refocuses the
mischief from the plainly criminally abusive to the culturally unlucky.
He implants the notion in a context where it may not matter enough for
Carey to instantly go and check, and having re-ordered the narrative,
Ball can then return and build upon its minimising implication at a
later time. This is textbook manipulative behaviour, like a conjuror
'forcing' an idea or a choice upon a victim.

I do not make false equivalence between the Archbishop and his victims,
whose abuse is infinitely deeper and longer lasting, but Carey is also a
victim of Ball. Many of Ball's victims were persuaded to ignore what
they thought and knew, and by the power of his charisma were induced to
adopt and trust the narrative that has been implanted and developed.

Another familiar technique of the manipulator was his use of the
Diocesan Registrar. Being close to his legal advisor, he might better
hope to avoid receiving clear distanced advice of a challenging kind. He
could build on the respect developed in happier times and thereby retain
a measure of control. He gets the firm to mislead the CPS on detail
about what is agreed, and they refer to a Royal reference which is never
produced: it is easier to suggest that the church should 'pay the
Diocesan Registrar' rather than 'pay my independent solicitor'. If the
Diocesan Registrar is fighting his corner, the Church of England is also
fighting his corner. Drip, drip, drip.

Later, when he decides the time is ripe to challenge the caution --
which he had been very lucky to receive -- he is happy to throw his
solicitor under the bus, claiming that the Registrar was incompetent and
let him down. Ball presents himself as the victim of advice he should
never have accepted. Each step of the way he is exploiting the
proximity, and rightly assumes that neither Carey nor anyone else will
go back, read all the notes and remind themselves, reconnecting to the
actual facts. Carey is only human. There is no computer to say 'No'.

This is classic behaviour which I have seen and encountered many times
from such people.

He develops the tyranny of small concessions. You are hooked and weary,
and just want to get on with other more important things. He wants to do
confirmations? He tells you he's already done some, nothing went wrong,
where's the harm? You can either go through it again or just give in
because it probably doesn't matter, and he is a great inspirer of
vocations and it was only a police caution: if it had been serious they
would have prosecuted him over that 19-year-old... ( see what I did
there?).

His brother Michael is a bishop who described his brother's behaviour as
merely 'silly' and, according to the report, behaved in a way 'close to
perverting the course of justice'. He tried to secure the status of an
assistant bishop for his brother, petulantly declining one for himself
if his brother were not similarly honoured.

Michael Ball has not suffered a penalty akin to that of George Carey,
although his role in keeping Peter Ball within the church fold was
crucial.

Archbishop Carey was ultimately responsible, but his brother bishops and
the church structures of the time gave him scant help. Every institution
of the time was making similar catastrophic judgements. Individualising
the responsibility is not helpful because the very function of the
scapegoat is to remove the sin from others. To coin a current phrase,
the inadequacies from this time were of the many, not the few.

We must be careful to ensure that such reports continue to usefully
inform us. George Carey co-operated with the Gibb Inquiry, and so, to
his credit, did Bishop Michael Ball. These reports are improved by the
frank and willing engagement of those who remember, though when there is
delay, several of those who could have added perspective have died. They
will include some who might have added to the indictment of George
Carey, but also those who might have aided his defence. Justice delayed
is indeed justice denied.

I offer the suggestion that it may be best for society if these kind of
inquiries are regarded as more akin to the South African 'Truth and
Reconciliation Commission'. Used in this way, we gain better insights
and have a better chance of understanding how to avoid these problems in
the future.

George Carey has been forced to resign. If he is now prosecuted, as some
are now demanding, what message will that give future potential
witnesses, and how might that distort our future ability to be informed
and to learn? Pour encourager les autres has some coercive value, but it
is not an obviously moral impulse when applied to a witness who has
agreed to engage with his failures, only to find that his honesty paves
the way to prosecution. We gain more from George Carey and Michael Ball
testifying than from Peter Ball 'taking the Fifth Amendment'.

The Gibb Report is but the start of the problem from the Church of
England's point of view. The Carlile Report into errors of the church in
its handling of historical abuse in the case of Bishop George Bell will
almost certainly add to our woes and the clamour for reform. The two
reports deal with separate issues, but they have one thing in common:
the current Bishops shaped the agenda. I say that as a structural point
and in no way to personalise criticism of people doing their very best.
That may not, of course, be enough in this context.

Very few in the Church want or wanted abuse to go undetected. That
included George Carey.

The lesson that surely screams from the pages of the Gibb Report is that
those who manage complaints must be much more professional, organised,
and above all must not retain any personal connection with the person
under consideration. The case for the out-placing of the investigations
is becoming unanswerable. Unfortunately, if we direct our ire at the
hapless Archbishop, we are almost certainly taking our eye off a much
bigger picture.



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

Message: 6
Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2017 15:58:51 -0400
From: David Virtue <da...@virtueonline.org>
To: "virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org"
<virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org>
Subject: CofE General Sex Synod 2017: not one question about the
Persecuted Church
Message-ID:
<1499457531.1149312....@webmail.messagingengine.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

CofE General Sex Synod 2017: not one question about the Persecuted
Church

By Archbishop Cranmer
http://archbishopcranmer.com/church-england-general-synod-2017-persecuted-church/
July 6, 2017

Over the past few months Christians in the village of Jalalabad in
Ghazipur District, India, where temperatures frequently soar to 40?C,
have had their water supply cut to force them to deny Jesus. They have
refused. Al-Shabaab militants walked into Fafi Primary School, 60 miles
from Garissa in Kenya, and shot dead one Christian teacher in front of
his pupils, and kidnapped another.

Buses carrying Christians in Egypt are being attacked, and children
slaughtered. Christian girls in Cairo are being kidnapped. Christians in
Syria are being abducted. Christians in Pakistan are being subjected to
false accusations of blasphemy, and being summarily dealt with: Asia
Bibi has been languishing in a Pakistani prison since 2010. Churches are
being torched and Christians taken hostage in the Philippines. In Iran
for Christians have been sentenced to 10 years imprisonment each for
engaging in missionary activities and "conducting activities against
national security".

Pastor Zhang Shaojie in China is barely alive after suffering torture in
prison. In Eritrea Christians are being routinely rounded up and
detained. In Iraq, many Christians have been wiped out; thousands are
now displaced.

But fear not, the General Synod of the Church of England is profoundly
concerned about these matters...

Of the 85 listed Synod questions, not one -- not one -- is concerned
with the plight of the persecuted church worldwide. There are questions
about sex, sexuality, sex, LGBT, sex, LGTBQIA (what?), sex, LGBTI, sex,
same-sex marriage, sex, 'gay cure' conversion therapy, sex, sex, and
sex. O, there's a question on 'Monitoring air quality', too. That's
diversity of obsession.

Welcome to the General Sex Synod of the Church of England.

The Very Rev'd Kelvin Holdsworth set out the LGBT strategy last year:
"This can only be won in the Church of England in the General Synod of
the Church of England. Notwithstanding anything else I say below, it can
be won no-where else. That means building up a formidable synodical
operation that works vote by vote for inclusive policies. The key here
is that getting permission to marry gay couples in church unlocks all
the other things you want too. Yes, it is worth making every debate
about pensions, the forces chaplaincies, schools etc. all debates where
LGBT issues are paramount -- these are all things where LGBT rights need
to be talked about. However, equal marriage is the goal. And deliciously
in a synodical system it is possible (difficult admittedly, but
possible) to get things on the agenda. Oh, and don't forget that the
best way to provide jollity to a diocesan synod is to get enough people
elected onto it and propose a motion or two about the national policy of
the C of E when it comes to LGBT people. Don't forget that it was in
Diocesan Synods that the dreaded covenant was defeated in England.
Synods are your friends."

Some would call this 'entryism' -- infiltration and influence with the
objective of subversion and domination. All democratic organisations are
vulnerable to it, but most have mechanisms to mitigate it. In the case
of the General Synod of the Church of England, is it too much to ask
that those elected to it ought to swear to uphold the doctrine,
discipline, and worship of the Church of England? Or is that all in the
eye of the beholder? Might members assent to such an oath, but like
anti-Monarchist MPs in Parliament, cross their fingers as they swear it?
Would God smile at that, or applaud it? If heretics are lauded as
prophets, where is discernment?

If Synod is the Church of England's supreme law-making body, and if it
may be crammed with activists who have their own crusades and personal
agendas which are at variance with the Catholic and Reformed foundation,
what is there to guard the church against ever-expanding circles of
concentric permissiveness, under the guise of 'radical inclusion'? If
the answer is nothing, what makes the Church of England different from
the world?

Should we not, at the very, very least, be witnessing boldly and
forcefully to the world that we care about our brothers and sisters
around the world who are being persecuted, tortured and murdered for
their faith? Should we not convey in our agendas and propagate in our
schedules that we care deeply about the voice of the martyrs? 'Remember
them that are in bonds, as bound with them; and them which suffer
adversity, as being yourselves also in the body' (Heb 13:3).

Or is it that the bonds, suffering and adversity of the LGBT community
in England should truly eclipse the suffering of Christians in India,
Pakistan, Kenya, Egypt, Iraq, Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, China, North
Korea, Nigeria, Mali, Somalia, Afghanistan, Sudan, Syria, Yemen...?

It certainly seems so.

END



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

Message: 7
Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2017 15:59:19 -0400
From: David Virtue <da...@virtueonline.org>
To: "virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org"
<virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org>
Subject: UK: Why will this tormented sex abuse survivor be protesting
at General Synod in York this weekend?
Message-ID:
<1499457559.1149335....@webmail.messagingengine.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

UK: Why will this tormented sex abuse survivor be protesting at General
Synod in York this weekend?

By James Macintyre
https://www.christiantoday.com/a
July 5, 2017

A survivor of alleged historical sexual abuse in the Church of England
has complained that he has received no direct reply after writing to the
Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, for the thirteenth time.

Archbishop Welby met the survivor last year and the Church of England,
which is conducting an internal review into its handling of his case,
has put him in regular contact with its National Safeguarding Team
(NST).

The survivor, who has been known in media reports as 'Michael', was
allegedly the victim while a teenager of abuse three decades ago by a
retired vicar who was found to have committed suicide last month after
he failed to attend court. The body of Trevor Devamanikkam, 70, was
found by police when they went to his home in Witney, Oxfordshire, to
arrest him.

Devamanikkam had been due to appear before Bradford and Keighley
magistrates charged with three counts of buggery and three counts of
indecent assault in the 1980s. The charges were brought under the Sexual
Offences Act 1956 and related to a time when the homosexual age of
consent was 21.

Last year, Michael, whose has now waived his anonymity and whose real
name is Matt Ineson, lodged complaints of misconduct against the
Archbishop of York, John Sentamu, and four serving bishops, claiming
that they had failed to act on his disclosures of rape.

The complaints, made under the C of E's clergy disciplinary measure,
were dismissed because they were filed outside of the one-year limit
required by the Church.

According to Ineson, he disclosed the allegations of rape to Peter
Burrows, the bishop of Doncaster, and Steven Croft, the then bishop of
Sheffield and now bishop of Oxford, in 2012. The following year he
disclosed to Martyn Snow, the then archdeacon of Sheffield and
Rotherham, now bishop of Leicester.

In his letter to Welby, Ineson pleaded for the dismissal of the bishops
in question.

A spokesperson for the Church of England's NST said: 'When Matthew wrote
to Lambeth earlier this year, it was copied into a range of people and
it was immediately taken up by the National Safeguarding Team, on behalf
of the Archbishop, who have been in personal contact with him on a range
of occasions since then to offer relevant support and talk through
issues.

'The Archbishop takes all safeguarding issues very seriously and met
with Matthew at the end of last year. Since the police investigation has
come to a close the Bishop of Oxford has also been in touch to offer to
meet with him and discuss his case.'

Ineson referred to the report last month into historical sex abuse by
the former Bishop Peter Ball by Dame Moira Gibb, which concluded that
the Church 'colluded' with Ball and resulted in Lord Carey, the former
Archbishop of Canterbury, being forced to resign as an honorary Bishop
in Oxford.

'In [Dame Moira's] own words 'speaking truth to power', I will speak the
truth. I have no deference to any of you,' Ineson wrote. 'Why should I
have? Only the truth will set you free. Why are you afraid of it?
'Power' is only real power when it is used for the good. You may think
you are above the law, you are not. You are most certainly not above
God's morality.'

A letter Ineson wrote to Croft in 2013 about the rapes and the church's
alleged failure to act was copied to copied to Archbishop Sentamu and
Glyn Webster, the bishop of Beverley.

Sentamu acknowledged receipt of the letter with a four-line response,
saying he had read the letter. 'Please be assured I will keep you in my
prayers through this testing time for you,' Sentamu wrote.

In 2014, Ineson formally reported the alleged rapes to the West
Yorkshire police, who subsequently launched an investigation. Last year,
he instructed a lawyer specialising in child abuse to make a claim
against the C of E.

Devamanikkam continued to work as a C of E priest for at least a decade
after the alleged offences.

In his latest letter to Archbishop Welby, on 26 June, Ineson began: 'I
write concerning the rape and abuse I suffered at the hands of Trevor
Devamanikkam.'

He outlined the complaints made against the Church hierarchy and
complained about what he called an 'appalling' statement issued by the
Church last month from the Bishop of Bath and Wells, Peter Hancock, the
Church of England's lead safeguarding bishop, who said: 'We have been
alerted by police that Trevor Devamanikkam has been found dead at his
home. Our thoughts and prayers are with everyone affected by this sad
news and we have offered Michael pastoral care and support.'

Bishop Hancock added: 'We will look carefully at how we responded, as we
do in all serious safeguarding situations' and pointed out that support
had been offered to Michael by the National Safeguarding Team.

The statement also pointed out that 'Michael had a private, pastoral
meeting with the Archbishop of Canterbury at the end of last year'.

Ineson acknowledged the meeting but claimed: 'I...had a meeting with you
in November 2016 during which you would not discuss the matter in any
depth and you have not offered me any support whatsoever since. At our
meeting you did not even know Devamanikkam's name. So much for your
interest.'

He added: 'I wrote to you personally 12 times in 2016 and received no
reply and was ignored. Why was that? Considering the serious content and
the church's bad reputation on handling sex abuse cases and especially
ignoring victims, why was that?'

The Church said that the Archbishop could not respond during the police
investigation into the case.

Ineson called for an independent review into the handling of his case.
'If The Church of England is, as it appears from their own statement,
intent on looking carefully how they responded to my disclosures and a
review into its handling of the case is to be undertaken then the
question must be asked - who will undertake this investigation and
review? It must not be done internally by The Church of England or its
employees themselves or this would open to extreme bias in the same way
as it would be inappropriate for me to undertake such an investigation
and review for the same reasons.'

Ineson wrote: 'The Church of England has made me fight at every step to
try and achieve both justice and the further prevention of abuse by my
abuser. By doing this you have added to my abuse.'

He added: 'In my last letter to you I promised very clearly I would,
once the legal process is over, reserve my right to waive my anonymity
and speak out publicly about what happened to me and the way I have been
systematically treated by The Church Of England. You ignored that
letter.

'Now the legal process against Mr Devamanikkam is over. If you have a
heart at all I ask you give me some peace. The Bishops involved should
be removed from office/give their resignations...and I mean all of them.
Unless you have a complete clean slate the safeguarding failures will
never go away.'

Ineson has sent details of his case to all members of the General Synod,
which meets in York this weekend, and Ineson himself will be protesting
in York during the Synod -- the C of E's equivalent to a parliament.

This week, the conservative religious affairs blogger 'Archbishop
Cranmer' wrote: ['You] must address the legal hypocrisy...which demands
the resignation of Lord Carey after more than 20 years, while these
bishops remain in office, shielded by an arbitrary, non-statutory,
12-month CDM limitation.'

END



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

Message: 8
Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2017 16:00:40 -0400
From: David Virtue <da...@virtueonline.org>
To: "virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org"
<virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org>
Subject: Child abuse in the Church of England: hypocrisy,
inconsistency and ongoing cover-up
Message-ID:
<1499457640.1149471....@webmail.messagingengine.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Child abuse in the Church of England: hypocrisy, inconsistency and
ongoing cover-up

By Archbishop Cranmer
http://archbishopcranmer.com/child-abuse-church-england-hypocrisy-inconsistency-cover-up/
July 3, 2017

Child abuse is a seriously distressing matter. The violation, confusion,
fear, self-loathing, guilt, depression... suicidal thoughts. It can take
years and decades to come to terms with the misery and emotional agony,
and the scars never really heal. They may fade in time, but are easily
inflamed when scratched or picked at by tormented forefingers. And then
you try to hide them all over again, ashamed of the sores and blemishes
of a sin which wasn't even yours. Or was it?

Child abuse in the Church is not only seriously distressing, it is
eternally consequential: "If anyone causes one of these little ones --
those who believe in me -- to stumble," said Jesus, "it would be better
for them to have a large millstone hung around their neck and to be
drowned in the depths of the sea."

The Church of England has already thrown Bishop George Bell into a very
deep pond. It has also just hurled former Archbishop George (Lord) Carey
into a reservoir of excrement. In the case of Bell, the solitary,
uncorroborated testimony of 'Carol' was deemed sufficient to trash his
reputation -- some 70 years after the alleged abuse took place. In the
case of Carey, the report of Dame Moira Gibb was sufficient for the
Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, to demand Lord Carey's
resignation as an honorary assistant bishop in the Diocese of Oxford,
for apparently 'colluding' in child abuse some 20 years ago. There is
more than a whiff of scape-goating.

Contrast the swiftness and severity of these judgments with the
harrowing account below. This story has been circulating in the media
for a number of years, not least because the alleged abuser -- a priest
by the name of Trevor Devamanikkam -- committed suicide before the case
against him could be heard. His victim has hitherto remained anonymous
-- often named 'Michael' in the media. He has lodged complaints of
misconduct against the Archbishop of York, John Sentamu, and four other
serving bishops, claiming they had failed to act on his disclosures of
rape. Nothing happened: apparently, a CDM (Clergy Discipline Measure)
has to be issued within 12 months of the alleged misconduct. This might
be appropriate if your vicar is filching hymn books, but it is woefully
inadequate for dealing with the cover-up of chronic child abuse, the
effects of which may take the victim many, many years to process.

Funny, isn't it, how long-dead and retired bishops can be summarily and
expediently thrown to the wolves some 20-70 years after their alleged
moral shortcomings or professional failings, but those who are still in
active ministry and in senior positions are shielded by a non-statutory
12-month limitation, within which narrow window proceedings for
'cover-up' or 'collusion' must be initiated, or they fall.

Michael's real name is Matt Ineson -- or Fr Matthew Ineson, to give him
his formal style, for (amazingly) this molested, raped and tortured boy
went on to be ordained into the ministry of the Church of England. The
abuse he endured around the age of 16 has naturally affected his whole
life, but that suffering has been compounded by the sheer delinquency of
the Church of England in its competence and ability to let justice be
done and be seen to be done. Matt Ineson remembers everything, but all
the church seems to want to do is forget that he even exists. They have
put the phone down on him numerous times. A few have written with
assurances of 'prayer' and 'concern'. He asserts his case with abundant
evidence, but they sit in judgment upon themselves. Read his own words,
and weep:

You can read the full story here:
http://archbishopcranmer.com/child-abuse-church-england-hypocrisy-inconsistency-cover-up/

ALL OF THESE BISHOPS SHOULD RESIGN OR BE REMOVED FROM OFFICE, Says
Cranmer



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

Message: 9
Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2017 16:09:59 -0400
From: David Virtue <da...@virtueonline.org>
To: "virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org"
<virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org>
Subject: The Truth About the Transgender Movement
Message-ID:
<1499458199.1151341....@webmail.messagingengine.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

The Truth About the Transgender Movement

By Dr. David Kyle Foster
www.PurePassion.us
July 5, 2017

There is a war of the worlds going on in the shadows of our every day
awareness -- an unseen battle between the Creator God (YHWH) with His
army of heavenly beings and Satan with his fallen angels and demonic
hosts.

Though already lost, Satan continues to battle in order to enlarge his
dark kingdom before its inevitable implosion.

Nowhere is this battle more pronounced today than in the rise of the
transgender movement. It is the front lines in Satan's scheme to deface
and destroy the image of God that is stamped into our personhood,
sexuality, marriages, children and families.

The problem is, most transgender (TG) people are unaware of the forces
that drive them in unhealthy directions.

Forces of Confusion

There exists today a convergence of entities that collude with one
another to promote dangerous and damaging lifestyles & identities, (such
as homosexual and transgendered), as being natural and healthy
alternatives to what they dismissively refer to as an antiquated
"male-female binary" -- the idea that there are only two genders.

Entity #1 is a Wealthy & Powerful LGBT Movement (which for most of its
history distanced itself from TG people) but who now see it as a cause
that can be harnessed to increase their wealth, power and influence.
(The Human Rights Campaign alone - sometimes referred to as "Big Gay" -
brings in approximately $40 million each year, pays out more than $11
million in salaries, and spends more than a quarter of a million dollars
every year on lobbying Congress). This is the same movement that once
embraced pedophile and pederast groups like NAMBLA, allowing them to
march in their "Gay Pride Parades" until several decades ago when it
became politically inconvenient to do so. They have since focused on
reducing the age of consent for sex acts with minors and changing the
language of "child abuse" to "man-boy love", as more publicly acceptable
ways for achieving the same goal.

Entity #2 is Wealthy & Powerful Professional Guilds, (such as the
American Psychiatric Association & the American Psychological
Association), who ceased using science as the foundation for their
mental health diagnoses when they began caving to pressure from
homosexual activists 45 years ago. It began in 1973, when gay activists
began attacking the meetings of the APA committee that decides what
disorders appear in their official Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of
Mental Disorders (DSM). The attacks continued until committee members
(three of whom were secretly homosexual) relented and removed
homosexuality from the list of mental disorders. The decision was not
based on any science or new studies. It was based on fear and
intimidation.

In a poll several years later (1979), the vast majority of APA members
(69%) disagreed with the decision but were ignored. Today you can lose
your license if you disagree with the decision -- a threat that forces
therapists to keep their mouths shut. For example, when Pure Passion
Media attempted to interview therapists for its new documentary
(TranZformed: Finding Peace with Your God-Given Gender), only one could
be found (the late Dr. Joseph Nicolosi) to go on camera to talk about
the dangers of promoting transgenderism.

Entity #3 is The Media -- Ephesians 2:2 tells us that Satan is the
"ruler of the kingdom of the air". Almost all of TV, (including PBS),
film & theatre, much of radio, (including NPR), as well as most
newspapers & magazines have thrown themselves wholesale into promoting
this great deception - partly because the media is riddled with LGBT
people who pull strings from within, but also as a result of the agenda
laid out by Marshall Kirk & Hunter Madsen (in their book, After the
Ball) which was a manifesto for how to manipulate the culture so that it
becomes pro-gay & pro-trans. Their scheme has worked so well that any
reporter who dares to report on the actual science related to such
issues will be vilified and almost certainly fired for daring to be
politically incorrect.

Entity #4 is Public Organizations like government, education, the AMA,
public schools, colleges & libraries, etc. which have likewise been
pressured and deceived into promoting sexually immoral agendas. Today
you have gay & trans activists welcomed into elementary schools to teach
children how to perform the most perverted of sexual acts, how to
transition to the opposite sex, and worse. One recent trans activist
actually encouraged a group of very young children to become drag queens
while he danced around the room in his make-up, wig and glittery dress.

Entity #5 is The False Church -- a conglomeration of mainline
denominations that have been taken over by nonbelieving liberals and
gay/trans activists in order to provide religious cover for the
doctrines of demons that they promulgate. Although they do not
themselves believe in the authority of Scripture, they invent twisted
versions of it in order to sow theological confusion among those who
turn to them for divine guidance. As Kirk & Madsen proposed in their gay
manifesto: "Use talk to muddy the moral waters......raise theological
objections about conservative interpretations of biblical
teachings......undermine the moral authority of [conservative churches]
by portraying them as antiquated backwaters, badly out of step with the
times......set science and public opinion against institutional
religion". But take heed, as the Apostle Paul warned in Acts 20:29-30:
"After I leave, savage wolves will come in among you and will not spare
the flock. Even from your own number men will arise and distort the
truth in order to draw away disciples after them."

Entity #6 is a Deceived Public that continues to vote the deceivers into
office, whether in government, on school boards, professional
associations or elsewhere. As a result, those parents who have children
who present as homosexual or transgender and who naturally turn to the
world's experts for guidance are deceived into accepting and encouraging
the world's fallen agenda. They want to do the right thing for their
child and naively assume that cultural experts know what they are
talking about, but it turns into the blind leading the blind.
Pedophilia and pederasty are the next frontier on the activist agenda.
Already they have succeeded in having the wording in the APAs DSM
changed so that pedophilia is now considered a disorder only if it
causes distress to the perpetrator.

This same kind of semantic sleight of hand has been used to rename
"gender identity disorder" as "gender dysphoria" -- again playing on the
idea that it is disordered only if it causes distress to the
transgendered person.

Current American Psychiatric Association Definitions

"Transgender" (TG) is a non-medical, umbrella term describing
individuals whose gender identity or expression is at odds with the
genetic sex with which they were born - now referred to as "gender
dysphoria".

In modern parlance, however, transgendered individuals include
transsexuals, transvestites, drag queens, and (incorrectly) intersex
individuals.

TG conditions are independent of sexual orientation.

Transsexual is a medical term that refers to individuals who have
undergone some form of medical or surgical treatment for sex
reassignment. But in modern use, the term also includes those who want
treatment but are unable to get it, for one reason or another.

Transvestism or cross-dressing is a term that defines people who derive
erotic pleasure from dressing as the opposite sex, but in modern
parlance, it includes those who do so whether it causes erotic pleasure
or not.

NOT included are those who dress as the opposite sex for political
reasons (such as "Joan of Arc") or for reasons related to their job
(such as "Queen Hatshepsut" who donned male clothing and a false beard
in order to rule Egypt in 1503 B.C.).

Drag queens (or kings) are people who dress as the opposite sex for the
purpose of entertainment. Some are true transvestites, but others (such
as Milton Berle, Jack Lemmon, Tony Curtis, Flip Wilson, Tim Curry &
others) have done so simply for laughs.

Some drag queens are driven by a desire to mock the opposite sex by
exaggerating their sexuality, but others do it simply for the acceptance
that it brings them from a very enthusiastic clientele.

A Brief Trans-History

In the beginning, God made human beings in His image, male and female He
created them. He commanded them to multiply through sexual union in a
lifelong covenantal relationship with a member of the opposite sex --
one that was to prefigure the relationship that Christ would eventually
have with His Church (Ephesians 5:22-32).
When they sinned, however, the entire creation fell - all of it - both
man and nature. Man's heart was darkened and he began to worship the
creature rather than the Creator (Genesis 3; Romans 1:18-32).
Hatred, war and sexual immorality ensued. The very DNA of man became
corrupt. Sickness and disease spread across the earth. Lifespans
shortened. Babies died in childbirth and others were born with defects.

The vast majority of mankind lost all knowledge of the Creator, so they
invented mythical gods who reflected their own corruption.

Reports from the Ancient Past

To explain the birth of those born with sexual malformities, mythical
gods were invented who shared similar defects. According to Roman
historian Plutarch, Cybele was one of the earliest intersex deities --
an ancient Phrygian god referred to as "Mother of the Gods" who was
worshipped with orgiastic rites in the mountains of Anatolia, and later,
Greece and Rome. Depictions of her can be found in artifacts dating back
to the earliest civilizations in Mesopotamia, Assyria, and Babylonia.

According to the myth, Cybele was born with both male and female sex
organs and characteristics - an hermaphrodite according to Greek
mythology.

The Roman poet, Ovid, later wrote that Hermaphroditus, (from whom the
term is derived), was fashioned by the gods when they merged the son of
Aphrodite and Hermes with the water nymph, Salmacis. Ever since,
according to myth, hermaphrodites have long been a symbol of androgyny
or effeminacy, and have been portrayed in Greco-Roman art as female
figures with male genitals.

In the myth, Cybele's beautiful young friend, Attis, castrates himself
in order to found a priesthood for her, called the Galli. Various
ancient Roman sources refer to the Galli as a middle or third gender.
After Christianity was made the official religion of the Roman Empire in
the 4th century A.D., St Augustine wrote of seeing Galli "parading
though the squares and streets of Carthage, with oiled hair and powdered
faces, languid limbs and feminine gait."

Jewish rabbinic literature refers to two classes of intersex people.
- The Tumtum are persons whose sex is unknown, because their genitalia
are hidden. There is a state of doubt about whether they are male or
female.
- The Androgynos, on the other hand, are individuals who possess both
male and female genitalia and/or characteristics.

These were not to be confused with Eunuchs, who were castrated pagan
priests or temple prostitutes.
Historically, such intersex individuals have been considered the sex
that seems to prevail in their behavior.

"Intersex" Conditions are Not TG Conditions

Today we define "Intersex" persons as those whose sex characteristics,
including chromosomes, gonads, sex hormones, or genitals, are abnormal.
They constitute between .5 and 1.5% of the population.
The most common intersex condition is Klinefelter's Syndrome, where the
sex chromosomes display in variant ways such as XXY, instead of the
normal XX or XY. This results in one or more abnormalities during sexual
development, such as infertility.

Despite claims by trans-activists to the contrary, most of the ancient
references to behaviors that appear to cross normal sexual identity
boundaries are for what we now call "intersex" individuals.

Modern TG History in Brief

It was in the early 20th century that a handful of doctors began
performing crude sex reassignment surgeries, the most famous of which
was on Danish painter, Einar Wegener, who suffered through multiple
surgeries in the 1930s in an attempt to become a woman and conceive a
child. His story was retold in the 2015 film, The Danish Girl, starring
Eddie Redmayne. Wegener died as a result of his fifth surgery.

In the 1940s, Dorothy Tipton lived as a male American jazz musician
named Billy Tipton. Her own son did not know her secret until she died.

In the 1950s, after his discharge from the Army, George Jorgensen
underwent sex reassignment surgery and began calling himself Christine
Jorgensen. A now-classic headline declared: "Ex-GI Becomes Blonde
Bombshell".

In 1965, psychologist John Money persuaded Johns Hopkins Hospital to
begin performing sex reassignment surgeries, but after a 1979 study
found that those who had such surgeries were not more adjusted to
society than their peers, the Psychiatrist-in-Chief at Hopkins Hospital
(Dr. Paul McHugh) shut the program down.

Head researcher Jon Meyer declared, "Surgery is not proper treatment for
a psychiatric disorder. These patients have severe psychological
problems that don't go away following surgery" -- a finding reinforced
in a major 2011 study out of Sweden.

According to Dr. Paul McHugh:

? Sex change is biologically impossible.
? Transgenderism is a mental disorder that merits treatment.
? People who undergo sex-reassignment surgery do not change from men to
women or vice versa. Rather, they become feminized men or masculinized
women.
? Transgender feelings do not correspond with physical reality, in a way
similar to an anorexic who looks in the mirror and thinks they are
"overweight."
? 70%-80% of children who express transgender feelings will, over time,
spontaneously lose those feelings.
? "People who promote sexual reassignment surgery are collaborating with
and promoting a mental disorder."

Dr. McHugh also admonished those he called "misguided doctors" who
administer puberty-delaying hormones to very young children -- even
though the drugs stunt the children's growth and risk causing sterility.
Such actions, says McHugh, come "close to child abuse."

Leaving science aside, the media continues to line it's pockets by
promoting stories of celebrities who have declared themselves to be
transgendered, including:

? Chasity Bono (who now calls herself "Chaz")
? Female model Tracy Beatie (who gained celebrity by giving birth to a
child while calling herself "Thomas")
? Olympic athlete Bruce Jenner (who now calls himself "Caitlyn")
? Army soldier Bradley Manning (who now calls himself "Chelsea")
Even the Boy Scouts have yielded to media pressure and begun accepting
girls into its ranks who claim to be boys.

Serious & Significant Problems Among TGs

1. Significantly higher risk of mental health problems.

2. High HIV, Drug Abuse & Prostitution Rates
? 28% of male-to-female-TG have HIV
? 18% of men who have sex with men have HIV
? Less than 5% of drug users & prostitutes have HIV
? Less than 3% of female-to-male-TG have HIV
? Less than 1% of the general population has HIV
? 30% of TGs abuse drugs and alcohol (vs 9% of general population)
? One recent study showed that 34% had injected drugs in the past 6
months.
? A 2011 study showed that 80% of TG in Los Angeles were prostitutes.

3. Surgery Risks & Regret
? 25% have bladder and/or stool leakage
? Infertility
? Loss of sexual function

4. Significantly Higher Depression Rates, even after surgery

5. Twenty Times Higher Suicide Rates, even after surgery. (The death
rate increases dramatically approx. 10 years after "Sex Reassignment
Surgery" -- "SRS".)

6. Three Times Higher Mortality Rate

7. Three Times Higher Psychiatric Inpatient Care

8. Dangers of Hormone Use
? Cardiovascular Disease (-e.g., Hypertension)
? Weight Gain
? Stroke
? Blood Clots such as Deep-Vein Thrombosis is a side effect of
testosterone use.
? Liver Failure
? Mood Swings
? Heart Disease
? Increase blood sugar (insulin resistance)

9. Higher Lung & Hematological Cancer Mortality Rates

10. Major Problems with False Diagnoses
? From 2009-2014, there had been a 40-50% increase in children wanting
to change their gender, but in 2015, that number jumped to a 100%
increase (Britain National Health Service)
? 80% of youth w/GID eventually accept their true gender.
? The profits are so high and the expertize of "professionals" is so low
that people are quickly pushed into SRS with little to no merit for the
diagnosis (- as illustrated by Walter Heyer's testimony in TranZformed).

An Abrogation of God's Design for Human Sexuality

(per Dr. James Anderson of Reformed Theological Seminary)
A biblical anthropology has to be grounded in the first three chapters
of Genesis. It must acknowledge both the order and design of creation,
and the disorder and dysfunction introduced by the fall.

Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness. And
let them have dominion over the fish of the sea and over the birds of
the heavens and over the livestock and over all the earth and over every
creeping thing that creeps on the earth." So God created man in his own
image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created
them. (Gen. 1:26-27)
(Note the basic gender binary.)

And God blessed them. And God said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply
and fill the earth and subdue it, and have dominion over the fish of the
sea and over the birds of the heavens and over every living thing that
moves on the earth." (Gen. 1:28)

(Note the central place that procreation plays in the creation mandate.)

Then the Lord God said, "It is not good that the man should be alone; I
will make him a helper fit for him." (Gen. 2:18)

(Note the complementarity between the man and the woman.)

Then the man said, "This at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my
flesh; she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man."
Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to
his wife, and they shall become one flesh. (Gen. 2:23-24)

The institution of marriage presupposes that basic gender binary.

Genesis 3 records the fall of man. Paul gives us more details in Romans
1, citing the following causes.........

o Idolatry
o Darkened hearts
o Sexual confusion

So all of this provides a theological and philosophical context for our
response to transgenderism.
[Author's note] Deuteronomy 22:5 is the only Scripture that directly
impinges on TG disorders.
A woman must not wear men's clothing, nor a man wear women's clothing,
for the Lord your God detests anyone who does this.

God's command is grounded in protecting His design for human sexuality,
(a principle whose application adjusts as dress norms change in any
given culture), as a bulwark against anything that would reveal
rebellion against His design or its holy and prophetic meaning.

Dr. Anderson concludes.........
"Gender dysphoria is a genuine condition which is best understood as a
psychological disorder or dysfunction (and perhaps also as a deeper
spiritual disorder). It doesn't appear to have any simple cause and it
isn't something that's chosen.

The different aspects of transgenderism call for different kinds of
Christian responses.
We must distinguish a cultural response from a pastoral response. Both
are necessary and they are obviously interrelated, but we mustn't allow
one to drive the other.

On the one hand, if we let the culture wars define our pastoral
response, then that response will fail to engage with people on a
personal level and will lack compassion.

On the other hand, if we let our cultural response be defined by our
pastoral experiences, we run the risk of being too passive and
accommodating of what is a destructive movement (which will lead to more
pastoral problems).

Since the biblical view is that there are only two sexes, male and
female, and biological sex is the primary indicator of ontological sex,
any treatment for gender dysphoria should proceed on the assumption that
a person's biological sex (rather than their gender identity) defines
whether they are truly male or female. Consequently, treatments should
seek to bring a person's psychology in line with their physiology rather
than the reverse.

The sexual revolution and the LGBT movement don't merely invite God's
judgment--they are themselves a manifestation of God's judgment (Romans
1:18-32)."

A Way of Transformation for the TG Person

(This assumes you are working with someone who has repented of sin,
believed in & surrendered their life to the Lordship of Jesus Christ.)

1. Address any childhood sexual abuse or other trauma that may have
confused the child's sense of identity, being and/or sexuality.
2. Correct gender-based misinformation by parents, significant others
and/or the culture (as well as any other lies of the enemy that they may
have believed).

Parents or other family members may have wanted their child to be the
opposite sex and either communicated that to him/her outright or more
subtly in the ways they gave or withheld affirmation & acceptance when
he/she acted like a boy/girl.

Pray for inner healing for any father-wounds and mother-wounds. Teach
them how to be intimate with God the Father as a replacement for a
male-hating mother or a female hating father.

Deal with any "sins of the father" that may have been passed down (Ex
20:5-6; 34:7; Lev 26:39; Num 14:18; Dt 7:9; Ez 18:14-20) / Generational
Curses / Anger at God / Roots of Bitterness & Rejection / Inner Vows /
Unforgiveness / Occultic Activity.

Pray for any peer humiliation that they experienced, (especially related
to a rejection of gender), to be reversed by the acceptance of Christ &
His Body, the Church.

Pray to renounce the rejection of their biological sex and/or the
self-hatred that it induced.

Pray with them to accept their biological gender.

Repent of any use of pornography and masturbation and the core sin
behind such behaviors -- Idolatry.

Pray for revelation of and deliverance from any hidden demonic
strongholds.

Pray for any yet undiscovered biological contributors (-e.g., hormones,
brain chemistry, etc.) to be healed.

Pray for being washed (Ephesians 5:26; 1 Corinthians 6:11) and having
the mind renewed (Romans 12:2) with the Word of God.

3. Overturn any contributing cultural factors

If they grew up lonely & unaffirmed, yet were accepted and celebrated by
the trans community (not having understood that their acceptance had
more to do with their youth & beauty than anything else), pray that they
learn to receive that needed acceptance & affirmation from God instead
of man.
Help them to separate themselves from damaging relationships, (friends,
music, media, etc.) and to turn their attention to God's Word and
serving Him.

Help them find a church, ministry & other teaching resources that can
guide them in the lifelong process of transformation, such as.........

Help4Families Ministry
www.help4families.com

Dr. Neil Whitehead's website
http://www.mygenes.co.nz/transsexuality.html
http://www.mygenes.co.nz/transsexual_brain.html

Dr. Robert Gagnon's website
www.robgagnon.net
Thinking Biblically About Transgenderism
http://www.proginosko.com/2016/11/thinking-biblically-about-transgenderism/
www.PurePassion.us
www.TranZformed.org
Transgender by Vaughan Roberts
Transgender Confusion by Denise Shick
Transformation: A Former Transgender Responds to LGBT Issues by Linda
Seiler

* * * *

Dr. David Kyle Foster is the producer/director of Pure Passion TV and
the documentaries, "Such Were Some of You" (www.SuchWereSomeOfYou.org),
"How Do You Like Me Now? When a Child, Parent, Spouse or Sibling Says
They're Gay" (www.HowDoYouLikeMeNow.org) and "TranZformed: Finding Peace
with Your God-Given Gender" (www.TranZformed.org). He is also the author
of Love Hunger (Chosen), Sexual Healing (Regal) and Transformed Into His
Image: Hidden Steps on the Journey to Christlikeness (Laurus Books).



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

Message: 10
Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2017 16:10:51 -0400
From: David Virtue <da...@virtueonline.org>
To: "virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org"
<virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org>
Subject: Archbishops criticised for inviting proposer of Scottish
gay-marriage motion to York
Message-ID:
<1499458251.1151730....@webmail.messagingengine.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Archbishops criticised for inviting proposer of Scottish gay-marriage
motion to York

FOTO: SAM ATKINS: "Invidious position": Susie Leafe at the General
Synod, in 2014

by HATTIE WILLIAMS
https://www.churchtimes.co.uk/articles/2017/7-july/news/uk/archbishops-criticised-for-inviting-proposer-of-scottish-gay-marriage-motion-to-york
July 5, 2017

A GROUP of the General Synod's laity and clergy have been placed in an
"invidious" position, they say, by the "entirely wrong" invitation to
the Bishop of Edinburgh, the Rt Revd John Armes, to the Synod's York
meeting this weekend. They argue that it looks like an endorsement of
the Scottish Episcopal Church's change to its canons to allow same-sex
marriage in church.

Bishop Armes, who was invited by the Archbishops of Canterbury and York,
was the proposer of the motion to amend the Scottish Episcopal Church's
Canon 31, on the solemnisation of holy matrimony, which was carried by
the Scottish Synod last month (News, 8 June).

In a letter in this Friday's Church Times, Susie Leafe (Truro) and 14
other members of the Houses of Laity and Clergy write that they are
having to consider whether to "follow our consciences and withdraw".

Quoting the communique issued after the Primates' Meeting in January
last year, the Synod members write: "In 2016, the Primates of the
Anglican Communion made it clear that, though they desired to walk
together, the decision to permit same-sex marriages represented 'a
fundamental departure from the faith and teaching held by the majority
of our Provinces' and 'further impair(s) our communion and create(s) a
deeper mistrust between us.

"'This results in significant distance between us and places huge
strains on the functioning of the Instruments of Communion and the ways
in which we express our historic and ongoing relationships.'

"It is, therefore, entirely wrong that the Archbishops have chosen to
invite the Bishop of Edinburgh as an honoured guest to our General Synod
this week. It has put those who stand with the vast majority of the
Anglican Communion in an invidious position on whether they participate
fully in the Synod and are thereby seen to endorse the Scottish
Episcopal Church's decision, or whether to follow our consciences and
withdraw and in so doing be prevented from fulfilling the roles for
which we have been elected."

Only one of the six Scottish bishops voted against the motion on Canon
31. The only diocesan synod to vote against the proposal had been
Aberdeen & Orkney.

The Scottish Episcopal Church's newly elected Primus, the Bishop of
Moray, Ross & Caithness, the Most Revd Mark Strange, said last week
that, while he appreciated that some people were unhappy with the
decision, the Church "now needs to focus on its mission" (News, 30 June)

END



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

Message: 11
Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2017 16:11:29 -0400
From: David Virtue <da...@virtueonline.org>
To: "virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org"
<virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org>
Subject: Bullied by Canterbury and the Church of England
Message-ID:
<1499458289.1152009....@webmail.messagingengine.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Bullied by Canterbury and the Church of England

By Bruce Atkinson PhD
Special to Virtueonline
www.virtueonline.org
July 5, 2017

In his recent Viewpoints report (June 30, 2017), David Virtue quoted the
words of Oxford vicar Sam Allberry, which I will repeat here and then
expand on Allberry's and Virtue's excellent points.

"The Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, will get the biggest push
back to his call for "radical inclusion" when the Church of England
Synod meets next week. An Oxford vicar by the name of Sam Allberry,
self-described as same-sex attracted, is on record that despite his
attractions to men, he believed that to be a true follower of Christ
then one had to be celibate, just as our Lord was. He said that his
sexuality was not a matter of identity and that has become news.

"Jesus Christ never married or had a romantic relationship and never had
sex. If we say sex is intrinsic to human fulfillment then we say Jesus
was sub-human. My church has not become a safe place for me, I was
bullied at school and am now being bullied by Synod." He said the CofE
was in the process of pastorally undermining the church's official
teaching. The vicar got a standing ovation."
https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/article/two-minute-clip-homosexuality-every-christian-should-watch

My initial response was this: Well said, Rev. Allberry. First, no one is
guilty for the particular directions of attack (temptations) from the
world, the flesh, and the devil. Even Jesus "was tempted in all ways as
we are but without sin." Temptation is not sin. We are only guilty of
sin when we feed these temptations by lustful fantasies (internal
behavior) and act upon them (external behavior).

Most of those who take on a sense of sexual identity due to their
homosexual temptations (coming out as "gay") have already rationalized
their sin away, that is, they have accepted the sinful behavior as
reasonable ("not really sin because I was born this way and can't help
it"). Of course, this is merely self-deception. Science has proven again
and again that sexual attraction is quite mutable (it changes over time)
and that all sexual behavior (indeed all behavior) is a choice.

On the other hand, those who struggle with same-sex temptations but are
totally committed to chastity are in a different category altogether.
According to my understanding, they are NOT 'gay', NOT homosexual. They
are essentially no different from a person who might be tempted toward
heterosexual lust and/or acting out with someone not their spouse -- but
who fight off these temptations successfully. We do not call them
adulterers or fornicators just because they are tempted, only if they
sin. So why call people homosexual or gay simply because they are
tempted? Why exclude them from ministry just because they are tempted?

In earlier times, when everyone considered homosexual behavior a
grievous sin, those who were tempted never told anyone and often never
acted on the temptation (thus never sinned in this particular way). But
we live a time and culture where sexual acting out is virtually
worshiped, and thus homosexual behavior and lifestyle is accepted by the
secular culture... and by radically liberal Anglicans. Those who are
tempted to sin in this way are also tempted to so identify with the
desire ("I'm gay") such as to justify to themselves that the behavior is
OK. But it does NOT make it OK. The mere presence of a sinful desire
(temptation) has never made it acceptable to act it out. Such an idea is
patently irrational as well as immoral. But this is the modern deception
that the LGBT agenda has successfully perpetrated on our culture and on
nominal Christians. We know exactly the type of people Rev. Allberry was
referring to when he spoke of being bullied by the Synod.

The bullying began a long time ago in terms of propaganda and changing
the language. All the evidence about the high incidence of depression
and suicide among self-identified homosexuals totally reveals the
deceptive language in calling homosexuals "gay." They are among the
least happy and gay of all human beings. And the invented and
unscientific idea of sexual orientation as genetic and immutable was an
outright lie. Same sex attraction is merely one temptation among many.

This messing with our language is exactly what the LGBT lobby did to
make homosexuality (and same-sex marriage) acceptable in our culture.
This is what happens when some small faction gains significant power in
the media.

Professor Budziszewski in his classic essay "The Revenge of Conscience"
(First Things, June/July, 1998) expresses this truth succinctly: "Things
are getting worse very quickly now. The list of what we are required to
approve is growing ever longer. Consider just the domain of sexual
practice. First we were to approve sex before marriage, then without
marriage, now against marriage. First with one, then with a series, now
with a crowd. First with the other sex, then with the same. First
between adults, then between children, then between adults and children.
The last item has not been added yet, but will be soon: you can tell
from the change in language, just as you can tell the approach of winter
from the change in the color of leaves.

As any sin passes through its stages from temptation, to toleration, to
approval, its name is first euphemized, then avoided, then forgotten. A
colleague tells me that some of his fellow legal scholars call child
molestation 'intergenerational intimacy': that's euphemism. A
good-hearted editor tried to talk me out of using the term 'sodomy':
that's avoidance. My students don't know the word 'fornication' at all:
that's forgetfulness."

The frog-in-the-pot metaphor truly fits what we are seeing happen today
in the western churches. While the CofE has not technically changed its
canons, it is allowing blessings of civil same sex marriages in some
dioceses. This is an insidious deception, a con game perpetrated by the
liberals in the church. In a sneaky and even satanic way, the LGBT
agenda is being finagled into the church. It seems to be that winter is
coming soon.

British blogger Don Benson has accurately written: "There's a warning
here for all of us. LGBT activists have been so successful at promoting
their own eccentric notions on mainstream society that their particular
interests now take precedence over those of the vast majority of people
(including a disastrous withdrawal of the right of children to both a
mother and father).

But these interests are so patently out of line with the natural order
that they are clearly irrational. They involve a fundamental dismantling
of what experience tells us goes to make for a well-balanced and stable
society. And because they are irrational, they cannot exist without
coercion... In this case, irrationality involves looking at facts in the
natural world and dismissing them or 'reinterpreting' them so that they
are in line with [cultural Marxist] LGBT prescriptions of 'equality' and
'inclusion'." Bullying indeed!

The mainstream media, the church leaders, and the governments are all
choosing to live in denial. As long as they refuse to look at the
overwhelming scientific data regarding the destructiveness of this
behavior (to life and health, both mental and physical), then these
disordered people will be allowed to continue to do their damage to
themselves, their partners, their children, and thus to the society's
future. All for the sake of a little illicit and perverted momentary
pleasure. The issue is most certainly not about love. Love does not
require sexual acting out. Sexual self-control has always been a virtue
(chastity and celibacy among the single and faithfulness among the
married).

Benson goes on: "We are well aware of the coercion that has changed
language, withdrawn rights to free speech, is 're educating' young
children, excludes dissenters from employment (not least in politics and
journalism), and shut down intelligent debate. That's just in secular
society. What about the Church of England? ...
Well here's the warning: Your national church, led by Justin Welby along
with his LGBT activist friends, is about to ditch any pretense that it
will fight for your freedom to think and speak and act for the truth. At
the General Synod [they] intend to vote away the right of people who
wish to be freed from same sex attraction from seeking help. It will do
so on a thoroughly dishonest and already discredited basis, at the
behest of militant activists, all for the purpose of virtue signalling
(the Welby way) to make friends with its enemies: total capitulation."

The bottom line reality here is that the Archbishop of Canterbury is
squarely on the side of the heretical LGBT agenda bullies.

It is time for all orthodox, Bible-believing Church of England clergy to
personally disestablish themselves from this Canterbury and state
influenced organization. There are better options out there, and since
the consecration of orthodox Bishop Andy Lines, these options will only
continue to grow and flourish.

Bruce AtkinsonDr. Atkinson is a graduate of Fuller Theological Seminary
with a doctorate in clinical psychology and an M.A. in theology. He is a
licensed psychologist in clinical practice in Atlanta and also works as
a clinical supervisor training Christian counselors for Richmont
Graduate University. He is a founding member of Trinity Anglican Church
in Douglasville, Georgia.



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

Message: 12
Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2017 16:12:28 -0400
From: David Virtue <da...@virtueonline.org>
To: "virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org"
<virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org>
Subject: Will the Gay Rights Lobby Ban Bible Reading?
Message-ID:
<1499458348.1152112....@webmail.messagingengine.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Will the Gay Rights Lobby Ban Bible Reading?

By Rev Jules Gomes
http://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/
July 2, 2017

Farhad Tehrani is an Iranian Muslim. He is a student at a London
University, where I was Chaplain. 'I am so grateful I can talk to you.
My Imam would kill me if I told him I was attracted to other men. I feel
so ashamed of my feelings for other men,' he confides. 'You don't need
to,' I reassure him. 'God loves you.' He bursts into tears. 'I don't
want to have sex with other men. I want to submit my desires to God. I
am a Muslim. That is my identity. Will you help me?' he pleads.

Smita Agarwal is an Indian Jain. She comes to see me because our
Chaplaincy brochure says that we love everyone unconditionally. 'My
community would disown me if they knew I had lesbian tendencies,' she
says. 'As a little girl I always imagined being a mother. My parents
have arranged my marriage with a handsome businessman. I want to be a
good wife and mother. My dharma (duty, conduct, religion) is more
important to me than feelings and sexual attraction. I can't imagine
spending my life with another woman. What should I do?' she asks.

If LGBTI activist Jayne Ozanne has her way at the CofE's General Synod
in July, any counselling I offer Farhad or Smita, or any therapy I may
recommend is to be condemned. For Ozanne, it is 'spiritual abuse of the
worst kind.' In a private member's motion, Ozanne is asking Synod to
'condemn conversion therapy' (CT) as it 'is unethical and harmful and
not supported by evidence.' Thirteen professional healthcare bodies have
already endorsed the statement. Ozanne wants the CofE (when did it
become a professional healthcare body?) to become number fourteen.

Synod's General Secretary, William Nye, supports Ozanne. He finds
'conversion therapy intrinsically flawed.' He advises against supporting
it 'unless new and convincing evidence emerges that indicates conversion
therapy is both safe and effective.' CT covers a range of therapies
designed to change sexual orientation, but Ozanne and Nye do not define
what they understand by CT. Ozanne asserts that CT 'assumes the client
has a mental disorder' and describes her own experience of having
'voluntarily chosen to go through a whole range of prayer ministry--from
emotional healing to full scale deliverance ministry--in order to try
and "heal ourselves" of our "sinful desires."' Is this what she means by
CT?

There is a significant body of scientific literature on the topic, but
Ozanne does not cite a single study demonstrating the validity of her
claims. She is not a scientist. She is a militant LGBTI activist.
Ozanne's blanket condemnation of CT implies twin fallacies. First,
sexual orientation can be measured. Second, sexual orientation is fixed
rather than fluid.

Sexual orientation cannot be measured. The scholarly article Sexual
Orientation, Controversy, and Science, co-authored by six eminent
researchers, led by J. Michael Bailey, one of the foremost sex
researchers of our time, agree that a 'major limitation of existing
research relates to how sexual orientation is measured.'

The newly elected Primus of the Scottish Episcopal Church, Mark Strange,
who is married (to a woman) and father of three children, was once in
love with a man. 'In my teenage years I fell in love with two
people--one was a woman and one was a man,' he confesses. Would Ozanne
ban him from therapy if he was, at some point, seeking help in improving
sexual relations with his wife?

Ozanne's claims are seriously flawed. First, she does not tell us that
professional healthcare bodies also support 'diversity in religious
expression.' Hence, if an LGBT individual voluntarily chooses a
religious identity over his or her sexual identity it does not mean that
they have 'internalised homophobic doctrine' and should be denied access
to 'treatment that may facilitate an adaption' to a style of living more
in agreement with their religious beliefs, observes D. C. Haldeman, in
Gay Rights, Patient Rights: The Implications of Sexual Orientation
Conversion Therapy. Dr Haldeman is a member of the clinical faculty of
the Psychology Department at the University of Washington.

'Thus, both sexual orientation and personal values and attitudes (in
this case, religious/spiritual beliefs) are recognized by mental health
professional bodies as important domains of personal experience.
Further, these domains are to be respected and integrated into therapy
as appropriate,' write Drs Warren Throckmorton and Mark Yarhouse.

Second, Ozanne assumes that in every case an anti-gay, pro-CT
"organisation" is taking the initiative in seeking out clients in order
to shove CT down their throats. But what if an individual makes a free
and informed choice and the form of therapy is mutually agreed upon
between two consenting adults, the therapist and the client? If Ozanne
is seeking to ban consenting adults from doing what they wish in the
privacy of the counselling chamber, is this not 'unethical' and
'harmful' (to use her own words)--coercive at best, totalitarian at
worst?

Third, Ozanne's attitude is Eurocentric, Western superiorist and racist.
Her approach is so suffused with her own white privilege that it is
completely oblivious of the concerns of people with same-sex attraction
in traditional and Islamic societies. In effect, she is condemning
Farhad Tehrani to death in Iran and Smita Agarwal to a life cut-off from
her family and community in India. She is also forcing her own political
agenda down their throats and depriving them of the freedom to privilege
a voluntarily chosen religious identity over their sexual identity (the
latter a privileged postmodern luxury available to people like her).

Fourth, is total success the only criteria for evaluating any form of
therapy? If so, it should be unethical to provide cancer treatments to
patients, since the success rate is often low. Doctors warn patients of
the risks and side effects of such treatments. If some treatments have
failed, does that mean further research ought to be banned? Do
open-mindedness and trial and failure not constitute the very basis of
making progress in different scientific fields?

Can Ozanne offer empirical evidence for her claim that CT has failed?
She cannot! The area of CT research is fraught with methodological
problems. Foremost of these is sampling bias. 'It is nearly impossible
to obtain a random sample of research participants who have been treated
for their sexual orientation, and it is equally as difficult to assess
outcomes in a way that does not contaminate the scientific process with
social bias. This makes it difficult to make meaningful generalisations
about these treatments,' writes Haldeman. Also, 'few of the CT studies
offer any follow-up data,' he says. Given these limitations, most CT
studies report a success rate of 30 per cent in changing sexual
orientation. That's better than the success rate in the cure of certain
major diseases, Ozanne!

What about people who have other sexual attractions they wish to be
helped with? Pornography? Incest? Paedophilia? Sadomasochism? I am not
comparing these with homosexuality, but I am keen to know if Ozanne
classifies them as sexual orientations, sexual deviancies or mental
disorders (or "sin" for that matter). Many red-blooded heterosexual men
would admit that their own sexual orientation is hardly monogamous and
sometimes they seek counselling or therapy while struggling with
attraction towards other women who are not their wives. Does Ozanne wish
to ban therapy for such people? What if a person who is same-sex
attracted does not wish to change her sexual orientation, but is seeking
therapy to help her remain celibate?

By her own standards, Jayne Ozanne is guilty of spiritual abuse and
coercion. She is seeking to use the authority of the established CofE to
drive through an absolutist political agenda that will deprive
individuals of free will and free choice and prevent them from
voluntarily seeking therapy if they choose to.

Ultimately, her real goal is to get churches to stop preaching the
offensive doctrine that homosexual practice is sinful. Taken to its
logical conclusion, she will have to ban Bible reading--because the
biblical texts prohibiting homosexuality can themselves be proscribed as
homophobic and spiritually abusive. It is on this basis that police
arrested street-preachers Mike Overd and Michael Stockwell for quoting
biblical texts on homosexuality. The public prosecutor claimed that
publicly quoting parts of the King James Bible in modern Britain should
'be considered to be abusive and is a criminal matter.'

Of course, the topping irony of July's General Synod is that another
motion will seek to discuss reaffirmation of baptismal vows for
transgender people. These transgender people have undergone painful
psychological and surgical therapy and treatment in the process of
conversion. Why is it ethical for someone to convert from one gender to
another but unethical to seek to convert from one sexual orientation to
another?

Ed Shaw is an Anglican minister. He is also a member of General Synod.
He is gay but celibate. He co-leads Living Out--a ministry which helps
Christians 'who experience same-sex attraction stay faithful to biblical
teaching on sexual ethics and flourish at the same time.' Shaw has
responded to Jayne Ozanne in the liberating language of rights: 'We
believe that everyone, gay or straight, has the right to make their own
informed choice whether to receive counselling or psychotherapy on any
issue they might choose--including their sexuality. Passing this motion
could limit that precious freedom.'

(The names of the Iranian Muslim and the Indian Jain have been changed
to protect their identities)

The Rev'd Dr Jules Gomes is pastor of St Augustine's Church, Douglas, on
the Isle of Man.



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

Message: 13
Date: Fri, 07 Jul 2017 16:16:15 -0400
From: David Virtue <da...@virtueonline.org>
To: "virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org"
<virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org>
Subject: PEACE: What does it Mean to be a Mature Christian Disciple? -
Ephesians 2:11-22
Message-ID:
<1499458575.1152418....@webmail.messagingengine.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

What does it Mean to be a Mature Christian Disciple?
3. PEACE (Ephesians 2:11-22)

By Ted Schroder
www.tedschroder.com
July 9, 2017

What is the difference between a Christian who is serene in all
circumstances and Christians who worry all the time? Where do I find
strength to battle anxiety and fear? How can I find and practice peace
on a daily basis? If I am a Christian I ought to be able to be at peace
with God, myself and others. Peace is at the heart of the Gospel. Christ
died to give me peace with God -- "since we have been justified by
through faith we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ"
(Romans 5:1). Christ died to give me peace with others -- ""for he
himself is our peace, who has made the two one and has destroyed the
barrier, the dividing wall of hostility... his purpose was to create in
himself one new man out of the two, thus making peace, and in this one
body to reconcile both of them to God through the cross, by which he put
to death their hostility. He came and preached peace to you who were far
away and peace to those who were near" (Ephesians 2:14-17). Christ died
so that I might have peace with myself -- "the mind of sinful man is
death, but the mind controlled by the Spirit is life and peace" (Romans
8:6).

Yet things come between me and God, and between me and others, and
between my lower nature and my Christ nature. I often feel guilty,
conflicted and anxious about many things.

Scott Stossel, editor of The Atlantic, has written a searingly honest
book entitled, My Age of Anxiety: Fear, hope, dread, and the search for
peace of mind. In it he reveals his own agonized search for relief from
anxiety disorders throughout his life and reviews all the theories of
the source of anxiety and the treatments for it. He describes anxiety as
apprehension about future suffering -- the fearful anticipation of an
unbearable catastrophe one is hopeless to prevent. At the root of all
clinical anxiety is some kind of existential crisis about growing old,
death, the loss of loved ones, the fear of failure and personal
humiliation, the struggle for meaning and purpose, and the need for
emotional security. It may also be fear of future accountability and
divine judgment.

We are influenced by our political and consumer culture that promotes
anxiety by the constant barrage of bad news, and a parade of unrealistic
expectations. The media thrives on conflict. Peace is an anomaly, it is
not the norm. Our peace is attacked all the time.

So how can I mature in the peace that Christ brings? Jesus promised:

"Peace I leave with you: my peace I give you. I do not give to you as
the world gives. Do not let your hearts be troubled and do not be
afraid" (John 14:27).

"I have told you these things, so that in me you may have peace. In this
world you will have trouble. But take heart! I have overcome the world"
(John 16:33).

The peace we are talking about is the peace of Christ: "Peace I leave
with you: MY peace I give you." That peace is found in him and what he
has done and is doing in us: "so that in ME you may have peace." He is
the Prince of Peace (Isaiah 9:6). He came to bring peace. At his birth
the heavenly host sang: "Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace
to men on whom his favor rests" (Luke 2:14) When Jesus enters into our
hearts and when we surrender to him as Savior and Lord we receive his
peace, his forgiveness, his love, his grace. Peace is Shalom: wholeness,
harmony, completeness. "It means fullness, having everything you need to
be wholly and happily yourself...the presence of love" (Frederick
Buechner). It is the restoration of the right relationship between us
and God and us and others. It is a recognition that God is in control
and that we do not need to be in control of everything to maintain our
peace.

How do we maintain this peace in our daily lives?

"Do not be anxious about anything, but in every situation, by prayer and
petition with thanksgiving, present your requests to God. And the peace
of God, which transcends all understanding, will guard your hearts and
your minds in Christ Jesus" (Philippians 4:6,7).

We attain peace through a life of prayer. We are to bring our daily
needs before the Lord in prayer. We commit our anxieties, our concerns,
our fears, our apprehensions, to God in prayer. We offer them up to him
for guidance, for perspective, for strength. We rehearse our blessings,
thanking God for all his goodness to us. We counter our pain and
complaints with gratitude. We recognize that "all things work together
for good to those who love God and are called according to his purpose"
(Romans 8:28). We identify the providence of God, that he has a purpose
for us in his plan for the world. We ask for perseverance when the going
gets tough. We ask for peace on the journey. We walk with Christ on the
Way, sharing his peace. We pray, not only for ourselves but for our
government, nation and the world in which we live. "I urge then that
requests, prayers, intercession and thanksgiving be made for everyone --
for kings and all in authority, that we may live peaceful and quiet
lives in all godliness and holiness" (1 Timothy 2:1,2).

We maintain peace in our daily lives by seeking to be peacemakers in
relationships. Jesus said, "Blessed are the peacemakers (Matthew 5:9).
"If it is possible, as far as it depends on you, live at peace with
everyone" (Romans 12:18). It will not always be possible to avoid
disagreement and confrontation but you must discern what is important
enough to break the peace. "The kingdom of heaven is not a matter of
eating and drinking but of righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy
Spirit....Let us therefore make every effort to do what leads to peace,
and to mutual edification" (Romans 14:17-19).

Dr. Richard Carlson wrote, "Don't Sweat the Small Stuff . . . and It's
All Small Stuff: Simple Ways to Keep the Little Things from Taking Over
Your Life" which became a runaway bestseller. He authored a series of
books: Don't Sweat the Small Stuff for Men, for Women, for Teens at
Work, in Love. His philosophy was that we all spend far too much time
fretting over trivia that is irrelevant in the long run ("sweating the
small stuff") and not enough time concentrating calmly on what's going
right, rather than what's going wrong. "We blow things out of
proportion," he explained: When people are dealing with the big stuff in
life - death, earthquake, financial crisis - they find an inner
strength. But they freak out over the smallest things. The big things
are few and far between, but the little things drive us bonkers. It's
very exhausting and it takes the joy out of life.

To be a mature Christian disciple is to know what is important in life,
to distinguish between God's will and our will. It is to seek peace, to
seek what makes for peace, to live in peace, to allow the peace of God
to guard your hearts and minds in Christ Jesus in the midst of chaos and
conflict. "Before you know it, a sense of God's wholeness, everything
coming together for good, will come and settle you down. It's wonderful
what happens when Christ displaces worry at the center of your life"
(Philippians 4:7, The Message). This peace of God is a gift of the Holy
Spirit. Seek to receive the Spirit of Christ for it is his peace we
need. It is in Christ that we find peace.

Heavenly Father: In the midst of the storm and stress of life, grant me
the peace of Christ. Help me to rise above the turbulence of my daily
fears to find my peace in you. Quiet my anxious mind with the awareness
of the power of your loving presence. Pour the oil of your Spirit on my
troubled consciousness. Let me rest under your protection. Make me an
instrument of your peace. Where there is hatred, let me sow love; where
there is injury, pardon; where there is doubt, faith; where there is
despair, hope; where there is darkness, light; where there is sadness,
joy. Grant that I may not seek to be comforted as to comfort; to be
understood as to understand; to be loved as to love. For it is in your
giving us your Son that we find our peace. Amen.



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

Subject: Digest Footer

VirtueOnline Weekly News Digest
http://www.virtueonline.org/listserv.html


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

End of VirtueOnline Digest, Vol 17, Issue 25
********************************************