VirtueOnline Digest, Vol 17, Issue 29

[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: August 4, 2017 (David Virtue)
3. South Carolina Supreme Court rules The Episcopal Church can
reclaim 29 properties from breakaway parishes (David Virtue)
4. "I have been ashamed of Episcopal leadership denying the
Christian faith..." (David Virtue)
5. The Logical Fallacy of Episcopal Presiding Bishop's Support
for Transgendered Persons (David Virtue)
6. Presiding Bishop places Further Partial Restriction on Bishop
Bruno (David Virtue)
7. UK: GAFCON bishop loses permission to officiate (David Virtue)
8. Forward in Faith-North America changes focus (David Virtue)
9. Why Synod's decision on 'therapy' is UnAnglican (David Virtue)
10. I can bless toilets but not gay marriages declares Bishop
Holtamc (David Virtue)
11. LEAMINGTON, Ont: Anglican church opens doors to Muslim
worshippers (David Virtue)
12. What Ever Happened to the New Atheists (David Virtue)
13. It's official! Bishop Bruno's wings have been clipped
(David Virtue)
14. Evangelicals: The missing piece in the Episcopal Church
(David Virtue)
15. England's orthodox Anglicans: agreed on Synod's implications,
divided on what to do (David Virtue)
16. BELLS (David Virtue)
17. THE BRUNO VERDICT: ECCLESIASTICAL TRIAL RAISES QUESTIONS
ABOUT THE CORRUPTION OF A DIOCESE (David Virtue)
18. Leaving the denomination (David Virtue)
19. The Mythical Middle (David Virtue)
20. KINDNESS: What Does it Mean to be a Mature Christian
Disciple? - Luke 6:37-45 (David Virtue)


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

Message: 1
Date: Thu, 03 Aug 2017 18:52:31 -0400
From: David Virtue <da...@virtueonline.org>
To: "virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org"
<virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org>
Subject: Table of Contents
Message-ID:
<1501800751.2520232....@webmail.messagingengine.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

VirtueOnline Weekly News Digest - Desktop & Mobile Edition
www.virtueonline.org
August 4, 2017

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

1. SC Court sees in Favor of TEC over Property Dispute * Bishop Bruno
Bashed again...
http://www.virtueonline.org/sc-court-sees-favor-tec-over-property-dispute-bishop-bruno-bashed-again-pb-uganda-archbishop-nixes


*********************************************
THE EPISCOPAL CHURCH
*********************************************

2. South Carolina Supreme Court rules The Episcopal Church can reclaim
29 properties from breakaway parishes
http://www.virtueonline.org/south-carolina-supreme-court-rules-episcopal-church-can-reclaim-29-properties-breakaway-parishes

3. "I have been ashamed of Episcopal leadership denying the Christian
faith" -- Bishop Allison
http://www.virtueonline.org/i-have-been-ashamed-episcopal-leadership-denying-christian-faith

4. The Logical Fallacy of Episcopal Presiding Bishop's Support for
Transgenered Persons
http://www.virtueonline.org/logical-fallacy-episcopal-presiding-bishops-support-transgendered-persons

5. Presiding Bishop places Further Partial Restriction on Bishop Bruno
http://www.virtueonline.org/presiding-bishop-places-further-partial-restriction-bishop-bruno

6. UK: GAFCON bishop loses permission to officiate
http://www.virtueonline.org/uk-gafcon-bishop-loses-permission-officiate


*********************************************
ANGLICAN NEWS IN NORTH AMERICA
*********************************************

7.Forward in Faith-North America changes focu
http://www.virtueonline.org/forward-faith-north-america-changes-focus


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

8.Why Synod's decision on 'therapy' is UnAnglican
http://www.virtueonline.org/why-synods-decision-therapy-unanglican

9.I can bless toilets but not gay marriages declares Bishop Holtam
http://www.virtueonline.org/i-can-bless-toilets-not-gay-marriages-declares-bishop-holtam


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

10.LEAMINGTON, Ont: Anglican church opens doors to Muslim worshipper
http://www.virtueonline.org/leamington-ont-anglican-church-opens-doors-muslim-worshippers

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

11.What Ever Happened to the New Atheists
http://www.virtueonline.org/what-ever-happened-new-atheists


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

12.It's official! Bishop Bruno's wings have been clip
http://www.virtueonline.org/its-official-bishop-brunos-wings-have-been-clipped

13.Evangelicals: The missing piece in the Episcopal Church
http://www.virtueonline.org/evangelicals-missing-piece-episcopal-church

14.England's orthodox Anglicans: agreed on Synod's implications,
divided...
http://www.virtueonline.org/englands-orthodox-anglicans-agreed-synods-implications-divided-what-do

15.BELLS
http://www.virtueonline.org/bells

16.THE BRUNO VERDICT: ECCLESIASTICAL TRIAL RAISES QUESTIONS ABOUT THE
CORRUPTION OF THE DIOCESE
http://www.virtueonline.org/bruno-verdict-ecclesiastical-trial-raises-questions-about-corruption-diocese

17.Leaving the denomination
http://www.virtueonline.org/leaving-denomination

18. The Mythical Middle
http://www.virtueonline.org/mythical-middle


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

19.What Does It Mean To Be A Mature Christian Disciple?
http://www.virtueonline.org/7-kindness-what-does-it-mean-be-mature-christian-disciple-luke-637-45



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

Message: 2
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2017 09:42:11 -0400
From: David Virtue <da...@virtueonline.org>
To: "virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org"
<virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org>
Subject: VIEWPOINTS: August 4, 2017
Message-ID:
<1501854131.2468369....@webmail.messagingengine.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

A heterogeneous church. It is of course a fact that people like to
worship with their own kith and kin, and with their own kind, as experts
in church growth remind us; and it may be necessary to acquiesce in
different congregations according to language, which is the most
formidable barrier of all. But heterogeneity is of the essence of the
church, since it is the one and only community in the world in which
Christ has broken down all dividing walls. The vision we have been given
of the church triumphant is of a company drawn from 'every nation,
tribe, people and language', who are all singing God's praises in unison
(Rev. 7:19ff). So we must declare that a homogeneous church is a
defective church, which must work penitently and perseveringly towards
heterogeneity. --- John R.W. Stott

When the leadership of a Church loses its moral compass, it is
invariably the result of abandoning the clarity and authority of God's
word, the Bible. --- Phil Ashey, American Anglican Council

"I fear you are right, my dear. We traditionalists have kept our finger
in the dyke for long enough, and her waters have finally broken. Do we
go with the flow towards the waterfall of apostasy or board the Ark of
Sanity and sail in the opposite direction?" --- Archbishop Cranmer

For the vast majority of people your gender identity aligns with your
crotch equipment. This is reality. For most people, anything else is a
bit of fakery and no amount of fake hormones and surgeries by your
favorite Dr. Frankenstein will change this. --- Fr. Dwight Longenecker

Dear Brothers and Sisters
www.virtueonline.org
August 4, 2017

The news broke Wednesday afternoon. The South Carolina Supreme Court
ruled that The Episcopal Church can reclaim 29 local parishes whose
congregations left The Episcopal Church in 2012 cannot take their
valuable properties with them, a decision that could set the stage for a
massive exchange of historic church capital in the region.

However, seven churches that departed can take their properties with
them because they never agreed to let the national church hold them in
trust, unlike the others, and therefore shouldn't have to forfeit them,
a majority of justices ruled.

It was not immediately clear in the ruling which parish properties fell
into which group. Attorneys scrambled Wednesday to decipher the
distinction, along with the fate of the beloved St. Christopher Camp and
Conference Center on Seabrook Island.

St. Michael's Church, the oldest surviving religious building in
Charleston, and St. Philip's Church, the oldest congregation in the
state, appear to be among properties set to return to The Episcopal
Church, several sources said.

This is a lengthy and detailed ruling, and our legal team and leadership
will be studying it closely in the days ahead. It is important to note
that the legal system allows for periods of judicial review and possible
appeal, so it will be some time before we can say with certainty what
the journey ahead will look like. Please be patient and know that we
will keep you updated along the way as information becomes available to
us, said Episcopal Bishop Skip Adams.

So, what will Skippie and the diocese do with 29 empty church properties
worth an estimated half a billion dollars? They can't sell them to
Muslim groups there aren't enough Muslims in Charleston. Perhaps a few
can be sold to independent evangelical start up churches, you know, the
same kind of churches that have the same evangelical faith as ACNA
parishes but without a liturgy.

"The opinions show a bitterly divided Court that could not agree even
upon the basic framework by which to decide the case (what the Court
calls "the standard of review"). I put a lot of the blame for this
divisiveness upon Justice Hearn, about whose blatant bias I wrote at the
time of the oral argument. Her opinion concurring with Justice Pleicones
might as well have been written by David Booth Beers," wrote Canon
lawyer Allan Haley.

So why didn't Lawrence's lawyers ask to have Judge Hearn recuse herself?
Is it this seemingly endless mantra that if we are nice to them they
will be nice right back. That has never worked. Never. You can read what
Bishop Adams did to a single whistle blower orthodox priest when he was
Bishop of Central New York. http://tinyurl.com/ydxedlq8 You will find
several stories about Adam's behavior, and then ask yourself what do you
think he will do in South Carolina. Once TEC liberals got their foot in
the door over sodomy it was down-hill all the wsay. There can never be
any accommodation over morals and doctrine with liberals and
revisionists. Generous orthodoxy is a myth. They bitterly hate us.

The ruling can be seen here:
http://www.sccourts.org/opinions/HTMLFiles/SC/27731.pdf

*****

THE EPISCOPAL CHURCH VS BISHOP JON BRUNO. The bully Bishop of Los
Angeles found himself in more hot water this week when Presiding Bishop
Michael Curry removed him from his authority over St. James the Great, a
property Bruno tried to take out from under the Rev. Cindy Voorhees and
her remnant congregation and sell it to developers. That is now not
going to happen.

Voorhees jubilantly wrote, "In a decisive action, Presiding Bishop Curry
issued an immediate order that fully restricts the ministry of Bishop
Bruno and COMPLETELY REMOVES his authority over St. James the Great --
property, congregation, and our Vicar. We are beyond words thankful for
the care and consideration provided by Presiding Bishop Curry and his
wishes for the preservation of St. James the Great and the continuation
of our service to God and our community."

By any reading Bruno is toast, but note it was about money and property
not doctrine, nor 'sound teaching' or about 'the faith once for all
delivered to the saints.'

Bruno has now been removed from all matters pertaining to St. James the
Great Episcopal Church as of Aug. 1, as the national church continues
its review of misconduct charges against him stemming from his attempts
to sell the Newport Beach property and displacing its congregants.

The move by Curry to transfer jurisdiction of the embattled church to
the Rev. John Taylor, bishop coadjutor of the Los Angeles diocese, is to
"seek to resolve the conflict over and determine the disposition of all
matters related to the property, congregation and vicar" Curry said.

Taylor is slated to replace Bruno upon his retirement in December.

The order comes just weeks after a five-member panel from the national
Episcopal Church recommended that Bruno be suspended for three years
after he twice tried to sell the 40,000-square-foot building and
surrounding property at 3209 Via Lido.

A final ruling is expected later this month.

*****

"I Have Been Ashamed of Episcopal Leadership Denying the Christian
Faith..."
Grace and justification by faith alone are the key doctrines of the
Christian Church
I have been solidly anchored in commitment to the Anglican Reformation

These are the headlines from an exclusive interview I had this week with
Bishop C. FitzSimons Allison, retired Bishop of South Carolina on the
occasion of his 90th birthday.

I first met Bishop Allison when my wife and I arrived in New York City
in the early 80s from Vancouver, British Columbia. I had been invited to
join the American Bible Society as their Media Director, and I had heard
about Dr. Allison and his preaching at Grace Church in the village of
New York. After listening to him, we became members of his church and
enjoyed wonderful preaching for two years as he preached on themes of
grace, redemption and justification by faith.

>From this position, he went on to become the twelfth Episcopal Bishop of
South Carolina. He began his episcopacy as co-adjutor of the diocese,
then became its diocesan in 1982. He retired in 1990, but remained very
active in preaching, speaking, and writing. He remains a tour de force
of low church orthodox Anglicanism with no equals.

Fitz, as he is fondly known to his friends, was born in 1927 and
recently turned 90, making him one of the oldest bishops alive in The
Episcopal Church and certainly its most knowledgeable.

The full interview can be read here:
http://www.virtueonline.org/i-have-been-ashamed-episcopal-leadership-denying-christian-faith

*****

The Archbishop of Uganda, Stanley Ntagali, has said that he will not
attend the next gathering of Anglican Primates in October because of
divisions over sexuality issues.

Archbishop Ntagali was asked by the BBC's Martin Bashir, who is
traveling with the Archbishop of Canterbury to South Sudan and Uganda,
whether he would attend the next Primates conference. 'No...I made it
clear I am not attending,' replied the archbishop, before attempting to
stop the interview, which he said was supposed to be about the refugee
crisis in the region.

Confirmation that Ntagali will not attend the Primates meeting comes
after he walked out of the last gathering in Canterbury in January last
year, accusing the American and Canadian Churches of having 'torn the
fabric of the Anglican Communion at its deepest level'.

In a letter to his Church in Uganda, the archbishop wrote at the time:
'On the second day of the gathering, I moved a resolution that asked the
Episcopal Church USA and the Anglican Church of Canada to voluntarily
withdraw from the meeting and other Anglican Communion activities until
they repented of their decisions that have torn the fabric of the
Anglican Communion at its deepest level.

'They would not agree to this request, nor did it appear that the
Archbishop of Canterbury and his facilitators would ensure that this
matter be substantively addressed in a timely manner.'

VOL has been told that Nigerian Primate Nichols Okoh will not attend
and, most probably, all of the GAFOCN primates will not appear either,
though that has yet to be confirmed.

*****

Bishop Grant LaMarquand has resigned his post as bishop of the Horn of
Africa. He cites his wife's health.

"It is with a heavy heart that today I must announce my resignation as
the Bishop for the Horn of Africa within the Diocese of Egypt with North
Africa and the Horn of Africa. This decision has not been taken lightly
but after consultation with Bishop Mouneer, with spiritual counsellors,
and with our medical doctors. Wendy and I will leave Ethiopia at the end
of October this year, although our work for the diocese will continue
for a time.

"The reason for our needing to leave is that Wendy's health has made it
impossible for her to continue to live in Africa. As many of you know, a
few months ago Wendy experienced terrible pain in her back leading her
to seek medical testing and advice. The tests revealed five broken
vertebrae and a broken rib. The fragility of the bones have been
attributed to osteoporosis and the fractures were due to coughing.
Originally we believed that the coughing was due simply to asthma, but
after further testing it now seems that Wendy has also had lung
infections, perhaps several. Wendy's doctors have been clear that
returning to live in Africa would put Wendy's lungs (and ultimately her
heart) at grave risk. She will stay in Pittsburgh for the next two
months while I continue to work in Ethiopia. She will come to say
farewell during the month of October."

*****

COMPROMISE WITH SIN. A working group set up explore how different
strands of thinking on sexuality could be kept together in the Anglican
Church in Aotearoa, New Zealand and Polynesia has published its interim
report. The group was established after the May 2016 meeting of the
province's General Synod agreed to "let lie on the table" a motion on
the blessings of same-sex relationships. The Synod instead called for a
working group to look at structural arrangements to keep the different
sides of the debate together.

In their interim report, the working group recommends that there should
be "no alteration to the formularies of this Church" and that dioceses
and bishops should be allowed "to authorise individual clergy within
their ministry units to conduct services blessing same gender
relationships."

The working group also recommends that bishops and clergy should be
given immunity from complaints "for exercising their discretion on
whether or not to authorise or conduct services of same gender
blessings."

It also recommends "amendment of the declarations of adherence and
submission to the authority of [the General Synod]" and recognition of
"Orders of Consecrated Life to allow for those with clear theological
convictions to have those convictions respected and protected."

Explaining the recommendations, the working group says in its report:
"We have tried to create places where each can stand without compromise
to the beliefs they sincerely hold. The mandate talks of two integrities
but it is more than that -- there is a spectrum of views and so there
needs to be a range of possible ways forward.

"This range of tools means that if you are a clergy person who is unable
to support the blessings of same gender couples, then the canonical
changes will ensure that you are not required to participate in such
blessings and there will be no disciplinary nor adverse consequences for
you declining to be involved.

"Similarly, if you are a clergy person who is supportive of such
blessings or you see this as a social justice issue, then there will be
a structure by which such blessings can occur and there will be no
disciplinary nor adverse consequences for you conducting a service."

On the formularies of the church, the working group says that it
"acknowledges that as this Church is not of one mind on this issue it is
important that the doctrine on marriage not change and that matters
relating to the blessing of same gender relationships in this Church
continue to be tested and debated across the theological spectrum.

"To enable ongoing debate, the [working group] thinks the formularies
must remain as they presently are."

An authorisation by a bishop to a priest to conduct a blessing for a
civil same-sex marriage would be allowed under the provinces Canon XIV,
which allows a bishop to "authorise a non-formulary service for use
within a named ministry unit." The working group recommends that this
should be used when "the couple are duly married under civil law, when
the vestry or equivalent leadership body within the clergy's ministry
unit has been consulted and its advice considered in good faith, when
the service is in a form authorised by the bishop, and when the service
would not contravene the general laws of the jurisdiction in which it is
to take place."

But they stress that bishops and clergy should not be "liable to
complaint for exercising their discretion in this matter." In the
report, the working group says that it is "important that a bishop's
permission to conduct a service is granted only to clergy who wish to do
so. No clergy should feel obligated to take services contrary to their
theological conviction and conscience."

And they go on to recommend immunity from complaints, saying that "a 'no
discipline' policy is the best way to safeguard the consciences of
clergy and bishops.

In order for each viewpoint to safely co-exist within this Church each
needs to acknowledge that the other must have freedom of conscience and
action that aligns with their theological convictions."

GAFCON leader and former Sydney Archbishop Peter Jensen blasted this in
an editorial which you can read in today's digest.

*****

A new Anglican province came into being this week. The Province of Sudan
was opened on July 30. Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby, declared
Muslim-majority Sudan as the 39th province of the Anglican Communion.

The 61-year-old spiritual leader of the Church of England said he
believed that the declaration will mark "a new beginning" for Christians
in this predominantly Muslim country.

Welby was on an official visit to Sudan over the weekend where he met
with the faithful exhorting them to make sure the province worked.

Christians in Sudan have a responsibility to make this province work and
to make it loved by their brothers from abroad who must support it and
pray for it.

He also inaugurated the new leader and first Anglican Archbishop for the
country in the person of Ezekiel Kondo Kumir Kuku at the All Saints'
Cathedral in Khartoum.

"Christians in Sudan have a responsibility to make this province work
and to make it loved by their brothers from abroad who must support it
and pray for it," said Welby.

Since mostly Christian, South Sudan, became independent in 2011, the
Anglican Church in Sudan has been administered from Juba.

Sudan's Christian-minority, concentrated mainly in the south of the
country, in the region of the Nuba Mountains in South Kordofan, have
been long seen as persecuted with some priests having been arrested and
charged among others with undermining the state and espionage.

After the secession of the South in 2011, human rights organizations and
Christian groups accused the Sudanese authorities of persecuting
Christians and even destroying churches in the capital.

The Anglican faith unites an estimated 85 million faithful across the
world. Anglicanism was born out of a split with the Catholic Church in
the sixteenth century after the then Pope's refusal to grant King Henry
VIII of England the annulment of his marriage.

*****

In Leamington Ontario, Canada an Anglican church opened its doors to
Muslim worshippers.

The Rev. Andrew Wilson of St. John the Evangelist Anglican Church
offered the space to be used as a mosque after learning the Muslim
community had been renting a tiny location that was not big enough for
their needs.

Now Imam Asghar and many others regularly pray at St. John the
Evangelist Anglican Church, where the Muslim community has set up a
mosque, thanks to a deal worked out between the two religious
communities. "We tried to show the community in Leamington, and
everywhere in Ontario, that Muslims and Christians are hand to hand," he
said.

The mosque now regularly has 30 to 40 people coming in for the prayer
service.

Ironically, as Anglican churches open their doors to other religions
they continue to close parishes across the country even as gay marriages
in parishes take hold and Anglicans can be seen in gay parades.

In Howick, Ontario two churches closed recently. Trinity Anglican Church
in Fordwich, and St. Stephens Anglican Church in Gorrie. Both churches
held final services. Trinity Church services were first held as early as
1856, at the log cabin home of John Sotheran. St. Stephen's Church
records go back to 1856, when the first baptism was held. It is so sad
to see so many of our old buildings, with so many memories, no longer
being used, said a former parishioner.

*****

VOL's Summer Appeal is under way and we hope you will consider a
tax-deductible donation. We are light on funds and really need your
help. Summer is always a slow period for most non-profit organizations,
but the bills pile up and must be paid.

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, 04 Aug 2017 09:43:06 -0400
From: David Virtue <da...@virtueonline.org>
To: "virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org"
<virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org>
Subject: South Carolina Supreme Court rules The Episcopal Church can
reclaim 29 properties from breakaway parishes
Message-ID:
<1501854186.2468917....@webmail.messagingengine.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

South Carolina Supreme Court rules The Episcopal Church can reclaim 29
properties from breakaway parishes

By Jennifer Berry Hawes and Adam Parker
http://www.postandcourier.com/
Aug. 2, 2017

In a highly anticipated ruling, the state Supreme Court ruled Wednesday
that 29 local parishes whose congregations left The Episcopal Church in
2012 cannot take their valuable properties with them, a decision that
could set the stage for a massive exchange of historic church capital in
the region.

However, seven churches that departed can take their properties with
them because they never agreed to let the national church hold them in
trust, unlike the others, and therefore shouldn't have to forfeit them,
a majority of justices ruled.

It was not immediately clear in the ruling which parish properties fell
into which group. Attorneys scrambled Wednesday to decipher the
distinction, along with the fate of the beloved St. Christopher Camp and
Conference Center on Seabrook Island.

St. Michael's Church, the oldest surviving religious building in
Charleston, and St. Philip's Church, the oldest congregation in the
state, appear to be among properties set to return to The Episcopal
Church, several sources said.

The justices issued their 77-page divided opinion almost two years after
hearing arguments in the case. Now-retired Chief Justice Costa Pleicones
wrote in the lead opinion that he would reverse the entire trial court
order, which allowed parishes that left the national church to take with
them their church properties, the diocesan name and its identifying
marks.

The protracted legal journey began when about two-thirds of parishes in
the Diocese of South Carolina, along with Bishop Mark Lawrence, left the
national church in 2012 after years of bitter arguments over everything
from scriptural interpretations to governance powers. Lawrence's diocese
has since affiliated with the Anglican Church in North America, a group
that formed in 2009 as an orthodox alternative to The Episcopal Church.

After leaving, that diocese and 18 parishes then sued the national
church to retain control of more than $500 million in parish properties,
the 314-acre St. Christopher Camp and the diocese's name, marks and
other identifiers. The number of parishes involved later rose to about
three dozen.

At issue in the case is whether South Carolina civil law trumps a
hierarchical national church's own canons, backed by the First
Amendment's religious protections.

After a three-week, non-jury trial in summer 2014, Circuit Judge Diane
Goodstein ruled that in South Carolina so-called "neutral principles"
trump the church's constitution and canons. Neutral principles apply
civil corporate, contract and trust laws to this type of dispute rather
than deferring to a hierarchical church's internal rules. It marked an
important distinction because key issues at stake in the case include
whether the national church held parish properties in trust and whether
the breakaway group took proper actions under state nonprofit law to
separate from the national body.

Goodstein ruled strongly in favor of the breakaway parishes, saying they
had the right to leave and take the Diocese of South Carolina name and
their church properties with them. Those parishes include such large and
historic churches as St. Philip's and St. Michael's in downtown
Charleston, St. Paul's in Summerville, Christ Church in Mount Pleasant
and Old St. Andrew's Parish in West Ashley.

However, Pleicones wrote in the lead opinion that Goodstein improperly
ruled on the case by basing it solely on neutral principles and that she
wrongly said she was required "to ignore the ecclesiastical setting in
which these disputes arose." Pleicones wrote that "this error of law
led, in turn, to a distorted view of the issues in this case."

Justice Kaye Hearn agreed. "Of what importance is it that a religious
body be hierarchical in nature, if any individual church can choose to
disassociate from the higher body and take all property with it?" she
wrote.

The justices, however, split 2-2 on intellectual property issues at
stake, thereby leaving in place the trial judge's ruling that the
breakaway diocese could keep the Diocese of South Carolina name, marks
and seals. Chief Justice Donald Beatty expressed no ruling on the issue,
agreeing with colleagues who found the issues should be resolved in a
separate, ongoing federal lawsuit.

Each of the justices wrote an individual opinion, and several included
unusually pointed words at colleagues. Justice John Kittredge voted to
affirm the lower court ruling that civil law should override church laws
in the property dispute.

"The message is clear for churches in South Carolina that are affiliated
in any manner with a national organization and have never lifted a
finger to transfer control or ownership of their property -- if you
think you're property ownership is secure, think again," Kittredge said.

In fall 2015, the Supreme Court agreed to bypass the state appellate
court to hear arguments in the dispute that by then already had spanned
three years of court wrangling, millions in legal fees, a three-week
trial, 1,300 exhibits and an unrequited settlement offer. Two of the
justices who heard arguments have since retired but still ruled in
Wednesday's opinion.

The Diocese of South Carolina spans the entire eastern half of the
state, so Wednesday's ruling will have profound implications on
thousands of clergy and congregants, including those whose families have
worshiped at colonial churches for generations and now face a decision
over whether to stay or leave.

It is unclear whether the case will be appealed. In recent years, the
U.S. Supreme Court has declined to hear similar cases involving
departures from The Episcopal Church.

Bishop Skip Adams of The Episcopal Church in South Carolina, the diocese
that remains with the national church, said in an email to parishioners
that he was grateful for the decision but cautioned patience.

"It is important to note that the legal system allows for periods of
judicial review and possible appeal, so it will be some time before we
can say with certainty what the journey ahead will look like," Adams
wrote.

The ruling presents a dilemma for The Episcopal Church, which though
largely victorious now must decide what to do with so many reclaimed
church properties that might have few congregants filling the pews. Two
years ago, The Episcopal Church and Adams' diocese offered a settlement
aimed at ending the long-running ecclesiastical conflict that would have
allowed 35 breakaway parishes to keep roughly $500 million in church
properties. Bishop Mark Lawrence and his diocese rejected the deal.

Now-retired Chief Justice Jean Toal voted to uphold the trial court
order but acknowledged the difficulty of case and "five different,
strongly-held opinions." Those conflicting opinions extend to the clergy
and congregants who must sift through the complex decision and decide
their next moves.

*****

South Carolina Court Hands Down Mixed Ruling in Episcopal Dispute

Institute on Religion and Democracy Press Release

By Jeff Walton
https://juicyecumenism.com/2017/08/02/south-carolina-episcopal/
August 2, 2017

"Episcopal Church officials speak regularly about themes of
reconciliation, but their actions in the courts indicate that property
and exclusivity of their Anglican Communion franchise is paramount." ---
IRD Anglican Program Director Jeff Walton

Washington, DC-- Today the South Carolina Supreme Court in a 3-2 ruling
partly overturned and partly upheld an earlier District Court ruling
that had favored the Diocese of South Carolina, which dissolved its
connection with the Episcopal denomination in October 2012. The majority
reversed the lower court on the status of ownership for 29 of 36
disputed parish properties. A final ruling would affect more than $500
million in diocesan and parish properties.

On February 3, 2015, Circuit Court Judge Diane Goodstein ruled that the
departing diocese was legally entitled to the property and use of the
name "Episcopal Diocese of South Carolina".
A lower court ruling on the issue of intellectual property issues,
including which group controls the diocesan name and seal, was left in
place with justices splitting 2-2.

A majority of members in 49 churches voted to sever their ties to the
Episcopal Church and remain affiliated with the diocese following
disputes over the redefinition and reinterpretation of Scripture.
The Diocese of South Carolina is the fifth U.S. diocese to vote to
depart the national church.

Based on a review of yearly audited financial statements, attorney and
Episcopal Church blogger A.S. Haley estimates the denomination and its
dioceses have spent in excess of $40 million in litigation expenses in
disputes with departing Anglicans. In December 2011 the Diocese of
Quincy (Illinois) won a legal dispute on property ownership over the
Episcopal Church that was subsequently upheld on appeal. Litigation is
ongoing in the state of Texas, where the diocese of Fort Worth departed
the Episcopal Church in 2008.

In June 2017, the Diocese of South Carolina formally joined the Anglican
Church in North America. The diocese now counts 53 member churches and
more than 20,000 members.

Episcopal Church U.S. membership dropped 2.1 percent in 2015, the most
recent reporting year, a loss of 37,669 persons. Attendance declined
20,631 persons, down 3.4 percent.

IRD Anglican Program Director Jeff Walton commented:

"Episcopal Church officials speak regularly about themes of
reconciliation, but their actions in the courts indicate that property
and exclusivity of their Anglican Communion franchise is paramount. The
Episcopal Church has spent millions of dollars to litigate against
departing Anglicans.

"The Episcopal Church and its liberal Mainline Protestant counterparts
refuse to accept what has become obvious: the majority of many
congregations across the country do not want to depart their
denominations, but will do so if liberal leadership continues down an
unfaithful path.

"Sadly, the Episcopal Church appears more interested in the recovery of
property than in reconciliation."

*****

South Carolina Supreme Court Releases Divided Opinion on Diocese of
South Carolina and Its Historic Property
A sharply divided court reverses portions of the lower court ruling

COLUMBIA, S.C. (August 2, 2017) -- In a 77 page opinion, the South
Carolina Supreme Court today reversed portions of an earlier lower court
ruling. In February 2015, circuit court Judge Diane Goodstein ruled that
the Diocese of South Carolina, its trustees and the 50 parishes --
representing 80 percent of the members -- that disassociated with the
Diocese successfully withdrew from The Episcopal Church (TEC) in 2012,
taking all their property, including churches, symbols and other assets.
The ruling was the result of a three-week trial in 2014.

That court found that "the Constitution and Canons of TEC have no
provision which states that a member diocese cannot voluntarily withdraw
its membership." This ruling found that had there been such a provision,
it would have violated the diocese's "constitutionally protected right"
to freedom of association. "With the freedom to associate goes its
corollary, the freedom to disassociate," Judge Goodstein wrote.

In a complicated ruling consisting of five separate opinions, the S.C.
Supreme Court today ruled that parishes which had "acceded" to the
national church's 'Dennis canon' are subject to a trust interest on
their property by the denomination. Eight congregations that had not so
acceded were judged to have full rights to retain their property.

The dissenting justices expressed concern regarding the long term
implications of this decision. Former Chief Justice Jean Toal stated
that the court should have relied on "over three hundred years of
settled trust and property law... I believe the effect of the majority's
decision is to strip a title owner of its property..." on the basis of
actions that do not create a trust interest under South Carolina law. In
concurring with Justice Toal, Justice Kittredge observed of other church
properties where there is affiliation with a national organization,
based on this ruling, "if you think your property ownership is secure,
think again."

This current litigation became necessary when TEC attempted to wrongly
remove Bishop Lawrence, and the Diocese, in response, elected to
disassociate from TEC. At that time a small group, of TEC loyalists who
had been preparing for this attempted removal began an intentional
campaign of using the Diocesan Seal and other service marks of the
Diocese. They began to function as if they were the Diocese of South
Carolina. To maintain its identity required that the Diocese defend that
identity.

Lead counsel for the Diocese, Alan Runyan, said the lead opinion and
concurring's decision is inconsistent with South Carolina and
long-standing United States Supreme Court precedent involving church
property disputes. Legal counsel continues to review a lengthy and
complicated ruling comprised of five separate opinions.

LINKS: Supreme Court's Ruling:
http://www.sccourts.org/opinions/HTMLFiles/SC/27731.pdf

Judge Goodstein's Orders:
http://www.diosc.com/sys/images/documents/tec/15_2_3_final_order.pdf
http://www.diosc.com/sys/images/documents/tec/goodstein_denies_reconsider_2_23_25.pdf

History of the Case and The Diocese of South Carolina:
http://www.diosc.com/sys/legal-media



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

Message: 4
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2017 09:43:29 -0400
From: David Virtue <da...@virtueonline.org>
To: "virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org"
<virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org>
Subject: "I have been ashamed of Episcopal leadership denying the
Christian faith..."
Message-ID:
<1501854209.2469002....@webmail.messagingengine.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

"I have been ashamed of Episcopal leadership denying the Christian
faith..."
Grace and justification by faith alone are the key doctrines of the
Christian Church
I have been solidly anchored in commitment to the Anglican Reformation

An exclusive interview with Bishop C. Fitzsimons Allison, Episcopal
Bishop of South Carolina (ret.) on the occasion of his 90th birthday.

By David W. Virtue DD
www.virtueonline.org
July 31, 2017

I first met Bishop Allison when my wife and I arrived in New York City
in the early 80s from Vancouver, British Columbia. I had been invited to
join the American Bible Society as their Media Director, and I had heard
about Dr. Allison and his preaching at Grace Church in the village of
New York. After listening to him, we became members of his church and
enjoyed wonderful preaching for two years as he preached on themes of
grace, redemption and justification by faith.

>From this position, he went on to become the twelfth Episcopal Bishop of
South Carolina. He began his episcopacy as co-adjutor of the diocese,
then became its diocesan in 1982. He retired in 1990, but remained very
active in preaching, speaking, and writing. He remains a tour de force
of low church orthodox Anglicanism with no equals.

Fitz, as he is fondly known to his friends, was born in 1927 and
recently turned 90, making him one of the oldest bishops alive in The
Episcopal Church and certainly its most knowledgeable.

He was president of the parish and diocesan Young People groups, as well
as representative to the Provincial and National Youth Commission
meetings. Raised in Columbia, South Carolina, he attended the University
of South Carolina and received a BA degree from the University of the
South at Sewanee. His studies were interrupted with service in the
United States Army during World War II. Following his discharge with the
rank of First Sergeant, he received a Bachelor of Arts degree in 1949
and then went on to study at Virginia Theological Seminary, from which
he graduated with a Master of Divinity degree in 1952. He was ordained
deacon in June 1952 and priested in May 1953. He later studied at Oxford
University and received the Doctor of Philosophy degree in 1956. He
taught church history at the School of Theology at the University of the
South and later at Virginia Theological Seminary. He was Adjunct
Professor at General Seminary and taught at Catholic University in
Washington, DC. He is one of a very small handful of bishops with an
earned doctorate.

He is solidly evangelical in faith and morals and has been in the
forefront of the Culture Wars in the Episcopal Church, challenging the
liberalism and revisionism of the Church as he watched it being taken
over by forces at odds with the faith once for all delivered to the
saints. He was one of the first open critics of the Bishop of Newark,
John Shelby Spong, and his 12 Theses. He has challenged the theological
and moral teachings of the Church as a recent succession of Presiding
Bishops have led the Church away from its biblical and historical
origins, starting with Ed Browning, then Frank Griswold and latterly
Jefferts Schori.

Dr. Allison is one of the few men I have known who combines in himself
the skills of both pastor and scholar. I have sought his advice over the
years and been well rewarded by it.

He is the author of five books including The Rise of Moralism: The
Proclamation of the Gospel from Hooker to Baxter (New York: The Seabury
Press, 1966); The Cruelty of Heresy: An Affirmation of Christian
Orthodoxy (Harrisburg, PA: Morehouse, 1994); "Guilt, Anger, and God: The
Patterns of Our Discontents" (New York: The Seabury Press, 1972); "Fear,
Love, and Worship" (published prior to 1972). His most recent book,
Trust in an Age of Arrogance, was released in 2009. His books argue
strongly for Christian orthodoxy, and specifically for Christian pastors
and teachers to be focused upon grace and justification by faith alone
as the key doctrines of the Christian Church.

In 2000, he undertook a controversial episcopal act. He participated in
the consecration of two bishops in Singapore, Charles "Chuck" Murphy and
John Rodgers, both former Episcopal priests, because of the growing
departure from the biblical and creedal faith by the Episcopal Church.

Bishop Allison talked with VOL on his life and ministry and his 67-year
marriage to his beloved bride Martha. They presently reside in
Georgetown, South Carolina. They have four children, 10 grandchildren,
and two great-grandchildren.

VOL: Have you always felt comfortable being an Episcopalian? Have you
ever entertained thoughts that because of the direction the Episcopal
Church has taken over the last 40 years that perhaps you ought to have
gone in another direction denominationally speaking?

ALLISON: I have been ashamed of Episcopal leadership denying the
Christian faith and their ordination vows, but have been solidly
anchored in commitment to the Anglican Reformation and to the faith
represented by Cranmer's Prayer Book. I have been given the
extraordinary gift of friends who also hold these truths and are even
more deeply committed to the Gospel than the faithful generations before
the accommodation to a self-destructive culture.

VOL: At what point did you feel a call to the ordained ministry?

ALLISON: When praying the General Thanksgiving in Morning Prayer while
in the Army in World War II and responding to the phrase ". . . by
giving up ourselves to thy service. . ."

VOL: What professors influenced you the most at Oxford, and what
subjects drew your closest interest and attention?

ALLISON: Canon V. A. Demant will always be a star to guide me in my
commitments. He expressed himself in such indirect impersonal ways that
I never felt denigrated, only miserably uninformed. It was a painful,
but wonderfully humbling experience to have him as my supervisor. I
learned something of how much I did not know. I have never lost my love
for the 17th century and such figures as Richard Hooker, John Donne,
George Herbert, John Owen and John Bunyan.

VOL: Was it always clear that you wanted to be a priest and not a
full-time teacher/professor?

ALLISON: I discovered in myself and in others a spiritual hazard in
teaching. It is valuable and even essential to do the scholarly work.
But speaking and writing about Christianity when one is not, at the same
time, preaching, caring, consoling and nurturing the hurt of dying folk,
leads to what the word "academic" has come to mean: "it doesn't matter."
I recall the announcer in a Super Bowl wondering what Theisman would do
and observing that the score was 35 to 9, with only 7 seconds to play,
said, "It's all academic now."

VOL: Did you ever think about another profession, or was the priesthood
the one and only ambition you entertained?

ALLISON: Whenever I did, it would have to have been a part of Christian
ministry.

VOL: What particular challenges did you face in the ministry and later
as a bishop do you recall that really pushed your buttons?

ALLISON: The general failure to appreciate the importance of ideas,
teachings, and doctrine. Our whole society needs to read and reread
Richard Weaver's Ideas Have Consequences (1948). The Episcopal Bishop of
Connecticut said it well: "Episcopalians are not given to think in terms
of doctrine." It is a statement of theological bankruptcy.

VOL: You are a well-trained theologian. How well trained is your average
bishop in the Episcopal Church today?

ALLISON: After serving 16 years on the Board of Examining Chaplains, I
can speak with some authority. The clergy are woefully ignorant of
scripture, history and theology.

VOL: I gather you are a great believer in continuing theological
education for the clergy? Why is that so important to you?

ALLISON: Our hearts are far more open to the Christian faith when we
have to preach to those who are discouraged or dying, than before a
blackboard in an academic class. We are the only profession that has no
required continuing education. Engineers, doctors, accountants, and
lawyers all must have periodic updates in training. We are missing a
great opportunity in that the clergy are much more ready to learn while
engaged in active ministry.

VOL: Apart from Trinity School for Ministry in Ambridge and Nashotah
House in Wisconsin, the Episcopal Church's eight other seminaries are
liberal in ethos and theology. How does that portend for the future of
seminary training for next generation priests in The Episcopal Church?

ALLISON: Seminaries must have students to survive or meld into other
seminaries. If not given confidence in scripture and creeds, they will
produce clergy whose parishes or missions will not flourish and over
time they will no longer be serving a congregation. The Diocese of New
York alone has some 400 non-parochial ordained clergy.

VOL: The Episcopal church crossed the line when it ordained an openly
homosexual priest to the episcopacy in the person of Gene Robinson,
later same-sex marriage was recognized when TEC changed its canons. This
was clearly a bridge too far for you. How personally distressing was
that for you? Was a line crossed that made you despair if the Episcopal
church would ever repent?

ALLISON: Things had gone so far already, that I was not surprised, but
had already been convinced that in the future, biblical and creedal
Episcopalians must find themselves in some way connected to orthodox
provinces in the Anglican Communion.

VOL: By any reckoning TEC has moved with the spirit of the age and you
have addressed that in your books. Is there any way back that you see
now or in the foreseeable future? Is the present Presiding Bishop
Michael Curry's embrace of the Jesus Movement, a hopeful sign for you?

ALLISON: Bishop Curry could not turn the Episcopal Church away from its
accommodation to the culture if he wanted to and he's given no sign that
he would want to.

VOL: In 2000, you flew to Singapore to participate in the consecration
of two former Episcopal priests, Chuck Murphy and John Rodgers, who had
formed the Anglican Mission in America (AMIA) as a rescue ship for
orthodox clergy and laity who could no longer in conscience stay in TEC.
That was a watershed moment for you and indeed for The Episcopal Church.
Were you frightened or concerned about the consequences of such an act.

ALLISON: Not frightened, but concerned that many friends who valued the
organization of the institution more than the faith of the church would
be upset with me and they were. When Bishop (Alex) Dickson and I failed
to get the 4th Province bishops to affirm their ordination vows in the
face of Spong's 12 Theses (because they said "it would be too
controversial"), we decided to participate in the consecration of John
Rodgers and Charles "Chuck" Murphy, who could then minister to faithful
and creedal Episcopalians in non-orthodox dioceses.

VOL: Were you ever threatened by then Presiding Bishop Frank Griswold
with inhibition and ultimately expulsion from the Episcopal Church for
participating in those consecrations?

ALLISON: In 2004, there was a gathering of some 2000 orthodox lay
people, priests and bishops in Plano, Texas. They formed the Anglican
Communion Network of Dioceses and Parishes (ACN) and vowed to uphold the
historic teaching and practice of the church. Bishop Robert Duncan as
moderator of the Network, asked five us retired bishops to visit and
confirm at a gathering of six orthodox congregations who were members of
the Network. I was joined by Bishops Ben Benitez, Alex Dickson, William
Wantland and Bishop Cavalcanti of Brazil. We confirmed more than 100
members of these parishes.

The House of Bishops demanded that we appear before the Presiding Bishop
and his Council of Advice (the presidents of the provinces). We agreed
to appear on two conditions: we would be able to discuss the matter of
doctrine first and the matter of polity second. The other stipulation
was that we would be allowed to have two non-participating observers at
the meeting. (Manning Patillo, President of Oglethorpe University, and
the Rev. David Collins, Dean of the Cathedral in Atlanta and former
chairman of the House of Delegates at General Convention agreed to be
present for us. The Presiding Bishop called off the meeting. I must
admit I was disappointed, since we would have been delighted to have the
chance to affirm our ordination and consecration vows and to invite them
to do likewise.

VOL: After the consecrations took place, Griswold high tailed it across
the Atlantic to request that then Archbishop George Carey condemn the
action, which he did. Were you disappointed that a fellow evangelical
did not come through for you?

ALLISON: George and Eileen are still our very dear friends. I am sorry
he was upset with me for crossing ecclesiastical boundaries and I am
sorry that he seemed to care more about the boundaries than the faith
that gave birth to its boundaries and to the church itself.

VOL: You have watched with dismay the slow decline and emptying of The
Episcopal Church. Your diocese (South Carolina) recently left TEC and
has now allied itself with the Anglican Church in North America. Was
that the right move for Bishop Mark Lawrence to have taken? Was it
inevitable in your mind?

ALLISON: Bishop Lawrence and our diocese were forced to leave or succumb
to new canons with arbitrary tyrannical power. ACNA is a way to remain a
part of the world-wide Anglican Communion, a large majority of whose
primates have unmistakably supported and recognized ACNA.

VOL: You have written five books, which of the five would you like to be
remembered by?

ALLISON: I really can't choose one as they are so different. Fear Love
and Worship is one of the very few books on worship that relates what we
do in church to the lives of the readers. The Rise of Moralism (my
doctoral thesis) exposes replacement of the Gospel by moralism in the
hitherto acceptance of cruel Pelagianism in Anglican history. The
Cruelty of Heresy is not a scholarly work on the early history of the
church, but is an attempt to show how heretical teaching leads to
pastoral cruelty and that heresy and sin are symbiotic. We are heretics
because we are sinners, not because we fell asleep in a lecture on
Nestorianism. I know of no secondary work that makes these two points.
Guilt, Anger and God is an attempt to analyze the alternatives to
Christian faith and to see the cogency of biblical belief. Trust in an
Age of Arrogance uses one short text from Jesus: "Take heed! Beware the
yeast of the Pharisee and Sadducee" to reduce the astonishing
complexities of the world's beliefs and the myriad distortions of the
Christian faith to a simple diagnosis and a simple affirmation. I wrote
it over a period of 17 years, thinking I couldn't write until I had read
everything on the subject. Oliver Wendell Holmes declared that he cared
"nothing for simplicity this side of complexity", but would give his
life for "simplicity on the other side of complexity." This was my hope
for the book. They are like my children. I can't pick a favorite.

VOL: You have never left The Episcopal Church as a bishop, but you have
watched the rise of the Anglican Church in North America (ACNA). Do you
approve that another Anglican jurisdiction was needed on North American
soil?

ALLISON: I am more sure of the need each day. I even believe that the
Church of England itself needs the faithful presence and witness of
biblical and creedal missions largely provided by those from what used
to be our "mission field."

VOL: GAFCON has emerged as a global movement to provide a safe gospel
harbor for primates and bishops of the Anglican Communion under assault
by liberal and revisionist theological forces in the West. Was this
necessary in your mind?

ALLISON: It was and is necessary and a great encouragement. It is
therapy for our hubris to have those to whom we have sent missionaries,
now seeing the need of mission to the United States, Canada, Europe and
Britain in their headlong race to sever ties with the Christian faith.

VOL: Your last book focused on twin themes of grace and Justification by
Faith. Why are these themes so important to you?

ALLISON: Because without grace, Christianity is merely law by which we
are all condemned. I think it is perhaps safer to say we are "justified
by blood" (Rom. 5:9) for it leaves less room for self-justification
(self--righteousness) which is the ongoing pervasive sin of us all. With
grace and God's justification "we have peace with God. (Rom.5:1)

VOL: If you had your life to live all over again what would you change?

ALLISON: I would repent and hope to be more grateful. Presiding Bishop
Jack Allin said it for me (and many others) in 1985. "I must repent for
I have loved the Church more than the Lord of the Church."

George Herbert also said it for me:

"Thou that hast given so much to me
Give one thing more, a grateful heart
Not thankfull, when it pleaseth me;
As if thy blessings had spare dayes
But such a heart, whose pulse may
be thy praise.

VOL: Thank you, bishop.



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

Message: 5
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2017 09:43:47 -0400
From: David Virtue <da...@virtueonline.org>
To: "virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org"
<virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org>
Subject: The Logical Fallacy of Episcopal Presiding Bishop's Support
for Transgendered Persons
Message-ID:
<1501854227.2469021....@webmail.messagingengine.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

The Logical Fallacy of Episcopal Presiding Bishop's Support for
Transgendered Persons
It develops from prolonged anxiety and depression. People are not born
that way.
The change is only cosmetic, says former trans-female
This population attempts suicide at a rate of 40 percent

NEWS ANALYSIS

By David W. Virtue, DD
www.virtueonline.org
July 29, 2017

Michael CurryNEWS ITEM: In light of President Trump's tweet banning
transgender individuals from serving in the military and the Department
of Justice's argument that employers can legally discriminate against
people on the basis of sexual orientation, I am compelled to oppose
these actions and to affirm the moral principle of equal rights for all
persons, including the LGBTQ communities. I do so as a follower of Jesus
Christ, as Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church, and as a citizen
who loves this country. --- Michael Curry, TEC Presiding Bishop

On July 12, 2012 at their 77th General Convention in Indianapolis, one
of the largest bi-cameral legislative bodies in the world, the Episcopal
Church, passed a series of resolutions taking the small denomination
into uncharted waters.

By overwhelming majorities in both the House of Bishops and the House of
Deputies, the Episcopal Church scored an historic first, brokering
transsexualism into church law. With the passage of the "transgender
twins," resolutions D019 and D002, it's now against church law to
exclude people who have had sex-changes from the life of the church at
any level. America and the world anxiously awaits the Episcopal Church
to ordain its first ever "trans" bishop.

In a similar vein, both Houses gave a resounding thumbs-up to
gay-marriage, breaking with Scripture and twenty centuries of Christian
tradition, to authorize rites for same-sex blessing. "I Will Bless You
and You Will Be a Blessing" hit the pews on the first Sunday of Advent,
December 2, 2012.

The consequences of these resolutions have cost the Church dearly. Its
numbers have tumbled into the abyss. Recent figures reveal that overall
membership has dropped by 30% and will continue to drop. Sunday
attendance has dropped by a third; child and adult baptisms have dropped
by over a half, with one official report saying that "in significant
parts of the United States, TEC has ceased or will soon cease to have a
meaningful presence."

But sex (in all its variations) remains the centerfold of TEC's raison
d'etre. It's as though every church member was being built up in their
most holy faith with copies of the Kama Sutra and not Scripture. The
Episcopal Church has, over time, descended into sexual anarchy.

Before he fled The Episcopal Church for the ACNA, South Carolina Bishop
Mark Lawrence wrote this:
"These changes to our Church's canons mark an even further step into
incoherency. They open the door to innumerable self-understandings of
gender identity and gender expression within the Church; normalizing
"transgender," "bi-sexual," "questioning," and still yet to be named -
self-understandings of individualized eros. I fail to see how a rector
or parish leader who embraces such a canonical change has any authority
to discipline a youth minister, Sunday school teacher, or chalice bearer
who chooses to dress as a man one Sunday and as a woman another. To
embrace an understanding of our human condition in which gender may be
entirely self-defined, self-chosen is to abandon all such norms,
condemning ourselves, our children and grandchildren, as well as future
generations to sheer sexual anarchy."

This latest decree by Curry will push the church into a deeper
enveloping darkness. Transgenderism is the new (but not necessarily)
final frontier of sexual aberration. For those of us who have watched
the pitiable decline of TEC over sexuality issues, we are not surprised
at seeing this coming. We at VOL paid attention because we have been
monitoring cultural trends for decades, even those way out on the
fringe.

Transgenderism is no longer on the cultural fringe, it is right in the
Church and TEC has embraced it. If it can happen to a cultural icon like
Caitlyn (Bruce) Jenner, then it can't be really that weird! Unlike
homosexuality, it has not touched most people and so most people just
shrug it off.

But the church cannot and should not embrace this new sexuality.

A former trans-female, Walt Heyer says he knows. The military should not
be burdened with the tremendous medical costs and disruption that
transgender in the military would entail, he says.

"When I discovered Congress voted earlier this month to not block
funding for transgender-related hormone therapies and sex change
surgeries, I wondered if it considered how devastating this will be to
the fitness, readiness, and morale of our combat-ready troops. Paying
for transition-related surgeries for military service members and their
families is beyond comprehensible.

"Perhaps they have forgotten that our military was forged to be the
world's strongest fighting force, not a government-funded, politically
correct, medical sex change clinic for people with gender dysphoria."

Gender dysphoria, he says, is the common diagnosis for one who feels at
odds with his or her birth gender. "It develops from prolonged anxiety
and depression. People are not born that way."

The "proof" for a diagnosis of gender dysphoria is having strongly held
feelings--but feelings can and often do change over time, he writes.

"The military is expected to prepare its members in warfare: to kill,
destroy, and break our enemies. The most important factors in preparing
a strong military are not hormone therapy, surgical sex changes, or
politically correct education. We need psychologically fit, emotionally
sound, highly trained troops to protect our nation from its enemies."

"I myself was fully sex-reassigned from male to female, and eventually
came to accept my birth gender.

"I have over 70 years of firsthand life experience, eight years of
living as a woman, 20 years of researching the topic, and 12 years of
helping others who, like me, found that transitioning and reassignment
surgery failed to be proper treatment and want to restore their lives to
their birth gender."

"Transitioning can be expensive--up to $130,000 per person for numerous
body-mutilating and cosmetic procedures over many months (or years) to
fashion the body to appear as the opposite sex.

"No matter how skilled the surgeon, or how much money is spent, it is
biologically impossible to change a man into a woman or a woman into a
man. The change is only cosmetic."

"The medical community continues to recommend this radical "treatment"
in the absence of scientific evidence that people are better off in the
long run. This population attempts suicide at a rate of 40 percent.

"Even after the full surgical change, they attempt to end their lives,
or tragically succeed.

"Over 60 percent of this diverse population suffer from co-existing
mental disorders. Consider Bradley Manning (now Chelsea Manning), a
former Army soldier who was so psychologically and emotionally
unbalanced that he stole confidential documents from the military and
forwarded them to WikiLeaks.

"The Military Is a Fighting Force, Not a Gender Clinic. The military
should not provide sex change surgery.

"Some service members will come to regret having undergone the surgery
and will want to detransition. Where will the military be then? Will the
military pay for the sex change reversal procedure, too?

"Failed sex change surgeries are not uncommon and will drive up the cost
to care for the military transgender population above the projected $3-4
billion 10-year cost.

"Beyond the financial cost, there's the question of the service member's
military readiness during their transition or detransition, as the
process often comes with a great deal of anxiety and emotional
instability.

"I know of many who have struggled to adapt to the new gender role for
years after reassignment surgery.

"In my view, as a former trans-female who works every day with
regretters, allowing the military to pay for sex change surgeries will
make a mockery of the U.S. military."

"As a person who lived the transgender life for eight years, I can
attest that assisting, affirming, or paying for hormone therapies and
genital mutilation surgeries would not have strengthened our military.
They would only have brought adverse long-term consequences, both for
individuals and for our armed forces as a whole."

END



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

Message: 6
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2017 09:44:15 -0400
From: David Virtue <da...@virtueonline.org>
To: "virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org"
<virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org>
Subject: Presiding Bishop places Further Partial Restriction on Bishop
Bruno
Message-ID:
<1501854255.2469033....@webmail.messagingengine.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Presiding Bishop places Further Partial Restriction on Bishop Bruno
"It is my hope that this action will help to facilitate positive steps
toward
resolution and reconciliation," the Presiding Bishop said.

Episcopal News Service
August 1, 2017

Presiding Bishop and Primate Michael B. Curry has issued a Further
Partial Restriction of Ministry to Bishop Jon Bruno of the Diocese of
Los Angeles.

Signed today by the Presiding Bishop, the Further Partial Restriction is
effective immediately and is intended to protect the integrity of the
Church's disciplinary process until it is concluded and also allow the
Diocese of Los Angeles under its new leadership to move forward even as
the disciplinary process with Bishop Bruno continues, as explained by
the Presiding Bishop

The Further Partial Restriction charts a way forward that clarifies and
respects the appropriate role and authority of the Bishop Coadjutor and
Standing Committee as well as the Hearing Panel and the Title IV
process.

"It is my hope that this action will help to facilitate positive steps
toward resolution and reconciliation," the Presiding Bishop said.

The Further Partial Restriction removes Bishop Bruno's jurisdiction over
all matters related to the St. James real and personal property, the
congregation, and the vicar.

Acknowledging that Bishop Bruno is not in a position to exercise
pastoral oversight of St James, it transfers pastoral oversight and
jurisdiction to the Bishop Coadjutor, with the Standing Committee
functioning in its standard canonical capacity.

Over all, "The purpose of this is to create space for the Bishop
Coadjutor and the Standing Committee to, a) exercise their respective
ministries of healing and reconciliation within the diocese, and, b)
seek to resolve the conflict over and determine the disposition of all
matters related to the property, congregation and Vicar, which is the
proper domain of their respective authority and responsibility as
leaders of the Diocese,"

The Further Partial Restriction expands the "Partial Restriction on the
Ministry of a Bishop" imposed by the Presiding Bishop on June 29. (See
here.)

The text of the Further Partial Restriction follows:
Further Partial Restriction on the Ministry of The Rt. Rev. J. Jon
Bruno,
Bishop of the Diocese of Los Angeles

On June 28, 2017, I issued a Partial Restriction on the Ministry of the
Rt. Rev. J. Jon Bruno, Bishop of the Diocese of Los Angeles, arising out
of actions by Bishop Bruno that in my view may threaten the good order
and welfare of the Church. As explained in that order, I had learned
that, earlier this year, Bishop Bruno entered into a contract for sale
of property (the "St. James property"), that has an important role in a
disciplinary matter now pending under the Title IV of the Canons of The
Episcopal Church, in which Bishop Bruno is the Respondent. According to
Bishop Bruno's submissions in that disciplinary matter, the contract for
sale of the St. James property set the closing date as July 3, 2017.

Bishop Bruno's actions and intentions regarding an earlier attempted
sale of the St. James property are currently under review in the pending
disciplinary matter. I continue to be deeply concerned that his act of
entering into a new contract for sale of the same property, while his
approach to the earlier sale is still under review, continues to have
the potential to undermine the integrity of the Church's disciplinary
process. I noted that the secrecy with which the recent sales contract
was undertaken has added to the potential for undermining the integrity
of the Church's disciplinary process.

The Title IV Hearing Panel with jurisdiction over this matter has now
issued its proposed Order. My review of the order and the factual
findings that undergird it, as well as my independent understanding of
the deeply impaired relationships among the respective parties, have led
me to have additional concerns about Bishop Bruno's exercising any
aspect of his episcopal authority over the St. James congregation, its
"Vicar," or St. James' real and personal property, during the pendency
of this matter in the Title IV process. In my opinion, any exercise of
more general authority by Bishop Bruno over the St. James congregation
while the Title IV matter is pending, including through a likely
prolonged appeal process when any suspension or other disciplinary order
would not be in effect, may threaten the good order and welfare of the
Church.

Therefore, as set out more specifically below, I have determined to
restrict Bishop Bruno's entire authority over the St. James congregation
until the Title IV proceeding is finally resolved, thereby removing him
from all diocesan processes and decisions involving St. James. The
purpose of this is to create space for the Bishop Coadjutor and the
Standing Committee to, a) exercise their respective ministries of
healing and reconciliation within the diocese, and, b) seek to resolve
the conflict over and determine the disposition of all matters related
to the property, congregation and Vicar, which is the proper domain of
their respective authority and responsibility as leaders of the Diocese.
With this restriction in place, I urge the diocesan leadership to press
forward vigorously toward reconciliation for the sake of the ministry of
the Gospel.

Accordingly, in order to further protect the integrity of the Church's
disciplinary process and the ministry of the Diocese regarding all
persons with a genuine interest in the pending disciplinary matter, and
thereby continue to protect the good order and welfare of the Church, I
hereby, pursuant to Canons IV.7(3), (4), and IV.17(2), place the
following additional partial restriction on the exercise of Bishop
Bruno's ministry until the pending Title IV matter has been finally
resolved:

During the period of the restriction, Bishop Bruno, acting individually,
or as Bishop Diocesan, or as Corporate Sole, or in any other capacity,
is forbidden from exercising any episcopal authority or jurisdiction,
secular, temporal, pastoral, or ecclesiastical, regarding in any manner
any of the St. James real or personal property, the congregation that
formerly worshipped in that property, as well as those who have since
joined as members, and the Rev. Cynthia E. Voorhees, commonly referred
to as the "Vicar" of the congregation.

This restriction is effective immediately. This document shall be served
upon Bishop Bruno today and shall inform him of his right to have any
objections to this restriction heard pursuant to Canon IV.7.

(The Most Rev.) Michael Bruce Curry
XXVII Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church



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

Message: 7
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2017 09:45:57 -0400
From: David Virtue <da...@virtueonline.org>
To: "virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org"
<virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org>
Subject: UK: GAFCON bishop loses permission to officiate
Message-ID:
<1501854357.2469230....@webmail.messagingengine.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

UK: GAFCON bishop loses permission to officiate
Bishop of Southwark blocks Bishop Andy Lines from ministry

CHURCH OF ENGLAND NEWSPAPER
July 28, 2017

GAFCON's appointment of a missionary bishop to Europe suffered a setback
this week after the man they consecrated last month has his permission
to officiate in the Diocese of Southwark withdrawn.

Such permission is necessary for a priest to undertake any duties in a
Church of England parish.

A spokesperson for the Diocese of Southwark told The Church of England
Newspaper this week: "All PTOs in the Diocese of Southwark fall due for
renewal on 30 June each year. Andy Lines wrote to explain that he had
moved his canonical residence to the Anglican Church in North American
and in view of this change in circumstance his PTO has not been renewed.

"This is a Provincial matter and would need to be dealt with at a
Provincial level."

Supporters of GAFCON in the UK expressed their surprise this week at the
move, and it likely to inflame still further the discontent conservative
evangelicals feel with the leadership of the Church.

Many are unhappy at two recent votes on General Synod -- one on
so-called conversion therapy for people with "unwanted same-sex
attraction" and a second authorizing liturgies to mark a person's gender
transition.

The vote last month by the Scottish Episcopal Church to permit same-sex
weddings in churches had been anticipated by the GAFCON group, who
moments after the vote announced that Andy Lines would be consecrated as
their missionary bishop for Anglicans in Scotland, the UK and Europe.

He was duly consecrated as a bishop by the Anglican Church in North
America's (ACNA) College of Bishops.

This week the director of REFORM, Susie Leafe, commented: "It is
extraordinary that the Bishop of Southwark would with to prevent a
godly, mission-minded man like Andy Lines from ministering in the
diocese."

Questions are being raised by conservatives because the Church of
England recognises the ministry of the Anglican Church in North American
as well as The Episcopal Church.

Prior to the news about the removal of Andy Lines' permission to
officiate, a number of conservative evangelicals wrote to The Daily
Telegraph to express their unhappiness and to suggest that new
arrangements would be considered later in the year.

The developments will prove uncomfortable for Archbishop of Canterbury
Justin Welby, who as an evangelical will find himself at odds with those
in his own constituency in the Church.

This issue of human sexuality had dogged the Church for decades but
after a General Synod rebuff to the House of Bishops' statement in
February a new Teaching Document on the subject was promised.
Conservatives fear that the Church of England is now on a more liberal
trajectory than they will accept.

Comments after the February Synod by Archbishop Justin Welby and John
Sentamu signalling a new policy of "radical inclusion" has also angered
conservatives who view traditional views on marriage as a defining point
of the Christian faith.

*****

Southwark diocese signals opposition to rebel Bishop Andy Lines by
withdrawing permission to officiate

Christian Today
July 28, 2017

The 'missionary bishop' consecrated by the conservative Anglican Church
of North America has had his 'permission to officiate' withdrawn by the
Diocese of Southwark.

Andy Lines was been told by the Archbishop of Canterbury his authority
will not be recognised by the Church of England.Anglican Church in North
America

Bishop Andy Lines will offer 'alternative oversight' to conservative
Anglican parishes in Scotland, England and across Europe who feel they
cannot accept the oversight of their official local bishop. His
appointment angered many in the Church of England, who object to what
they see as the promotion of a divisive splinter movement.

The Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby warned before the missionary
bishop was announced that any such appointment would 'carry no weight in
the Church of England' and cited canons from Christianity's formative
Council of Nicea in AD 325 to warn of the 'great disturbances and
discords' it would cause.

Lines had permission to officiate in the Diocese of Southwark which was
due to be renewed on June 30. A spokesperson for the Diocese told the
Church of England Newspaper: 'Andy Lines wrote to explain that he had
moved his canonical residence to the Anglical Church in North America
and in view of this change in circumstance his PTO has not been
renewed.'

The director of the conservative Reform group, Susie Leafe, said: 'It is
extraordinary that the Bishop of Southwark would wish to prevent a
godly, mission-minded man like Andy Lines from ministering in the
diocese.'

Lines still holds permission to officiate in the Canterbury diocese. The
diocese has not yet responded to a request for information on whether
this permission will be renewed.



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

Message: 8
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2017 09:46:18 -0400
From: David Virtue <da...@virtueonline.org>
To: "virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org"
<virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org>
Subject: Forward in Faith-North America changes focus
Message-ID:
<1501854378.2469281....@webmail.messagingengine.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Forward in Faith-North America changes focus
FiF-NA is in transition; furloughs paid staff

By Mary Ann Mueller
VOL Special Correspondent
www.virtueonline.org
August 3, 2017

Forward in Faith-North America (FiF-NA) is in the throes of transition
in part caused by a drastic drop in income and part by a refocusing on
the mission of the organization.

Executive Director Michael Howell announced that income for the
non-profit organization dropped from $49,815 in 2016. So far only
$28,993 has been added to the coffers in 2017.

However, ACNA Bishop Keith Ackerman, FiF-NA's past president, would take
issue with the definition that Forward in Faith is an "organization."

"Forward in Faith is not really an organization but it is a living
organism," the bishop corrects. "It is the inheritor of the Oxford
Movement, proclaiming the historic Catholic faith of the undivided
church."

So as a living organism Forward in Faith's proclamation of the historic
Catholic faith of the undivided church has not changed as much as it is
being refocused.

Forward in Faith is refocusing its understanding of its place in mission
by putting a renewed emphasis upon the financial support of men headed
for the priesthood and training already ordained priests to better
evangelize and present the Gospel message in today's world.

To help meet this goal Forward in Faith has been gifted with a half a
million dollar grant by Schwartz Trust. Income generated by interest and
investments will be channeled to support Forward in Faith's redefined
mission. The breakdown will be 75% going toward funding seminarians and
training priests to evangelize with the remaining 25% being plowed back
into the trust to help sustain it and make it grow.

The recent FiF-NA Assembly was held at St. Stephen's Church in Hurst,
Texas. Usually Forward in Faith Assemblies are held at Our Lady of the
Snows, Illinois located just outside of St. Louis, Missouri. But the
move to the smaller Texas venue was a cost cutting measure. Even with
the use of a scaled down setting, Forward in Faith is not planning on
hosting a 2018 Assembly.

Forward in Faith is not the only non-profit ministry to have to
tightening its financial belt in recent days. Only about 19% of FiF-NA's
membership monetarily support it. Since 2014 only 464 members has been
financial donors. The result is that Forward in Faith has had to
"furlough" its paid staff: Executive Director Michael Howell and
Executive Secretary Julia Smead.

It is hoped that at sometime in the future, when the nonprofit's giving
again increases, that Forward in Faith will be able to afford to rehire
its executive director and executive secretary. Until that time their
collective duties will be parceled out to various FiF-NA council members
and other cost cutting measures will be implemented to insure that
Forward in Faith keeps a strong internet presence and fulfills its
refocused mission and ministry.

Forward in Faith's President, Fr. Lawrence Bausch, said that FiF-NA's
internal restructuring does not signal the ending of a season but rather
a turning of a season.

Mary Ann Mueller is a journalist living in Texas. She is a regular
contributor to VirtueOnline



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

Message: 9
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2017 09:46:35 -0400
From: David Virtue <da...@virtueonline.org>
To: "virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org"
<virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org>
Subject: Why Synod's decision on 'therapy' is UnAnglican
Message-ID:
<1501854395.2469276....@webmail.messagingengine.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Why Synod's decision on 'therapy' is UnAnglican

By Vinay Samuel and Chris Sugden
www.anglicanmainstream.org
August 3, 2017

What has happened to General Synod that it now appears unable to weigh
evidence in coming to a decision, especially decisions that relate to
human sexuality?

A group of pastors and social activists persuaded good hearted and well
intentioned members of the Church of England to pronounce on extremely
complex matters that belong to the realm of psychology and psychiatry.
Thoughtful people were railroaded into a decision that seems not only
hasty, but given the state of the professional debate on this issue,
manipulated.

Ideologues, and even bullies, persuaded synod through emotive anecdotes
from people who have had bad pastoral experiences and so feel qualified
to guide the synod on all scientific, medical and therapeutic matters to
do with unwanted same-sex attraction. This is like people who have had
bad treatment at the hand of a GP claiming to direct the General Medical
Council on issues of clinical research and practice.

For centuries, the Church of Jesus Christ has offered prayer and loving
support through both its ordained priests and devoted lay people to
those who struggle with life's many storms and dilemmas. This is part of
its mandate from its Lord who says, "Ask and it shall be given you" and
through his apostle Peter "Cast all your care on him".

Why is it that, in certain areas, when society goes one way, the
corporate Church of England wants to be cultural when all its spiritual
resources and the historical experience of the Christian church are to
be counter-cultural. It has paid a heavy price for its collusion with
culture in the past -- with slavery, with colonialism, with the spread
of western 'civilisation', with being 'the Tory Party at prayer'.

As the established church the Church of England prides itself on being
the Church of the English people. So, the argument is deployed that it
must not alienate those people or espouse views that they regard as
'toxic'. For this reason, even people who believe that a man married to
a woman who experiences same-sex attraction, should be able to access
counselling to save his marriage and family, cannot bring themselves to
go against the drift of the culture.

The power of the culture in this case has been such that a Church which
has traditionally sought its authority from scripture, reason and
tradition, and has used reason and scientific knowledge very carefully
in coming to its decisions, has now taken a decision that has ignored
the careful debates and nuanced findings of scientific study on this
matter.

A powerful article by Professor Glynn Harrison and Canon Dr Andrew
Goddard published before Synod by a member of the Archbishop's Council,
Ian Paul argued: "the fact of this complexity should perhaps cause Synod
to reflect on whether as a body it is equipped to make broad
declarations about the effectiveness, or potential for harm, of SOCE
(Sexual Orientation Change Efforts). This is particularly the case given
the vast array of different counselling and pastoral approaches included
under this general label."

Debate still continues whether same-sex attraction is a condition which
may be addressed by counselling. Does 'therapy' necessarily assume
sickness? Edmund Mann, a sociologist, has insisted that there has been
no thorough scientific investigation of outcomes for therapeutic
attempts to change unwanted sexual attractions. There is certainly no
'evidence' of actual harm. Dermot O'Callaghan notes that in a major
study Robert Spitzer reported that "the majority of participants gave
reports of change". Professor Michael King reported this to the Pilling
Commission as, "change was possible for a small minority (13%) of LGB
people".

Taking a decision based on emotion and even fear rather than reason,
tradition and scripture undermines the very way Anglican Christians
accept truth. The General Synod is in great danger of being unAnglican
in the way it makes decisions.

Orthodox Anglicans have pointed out repeatedly since Lambeth 1998 that
unless scripture and the life of the kingdom of God is the rule and
guide of the church in the matters of human sexuality, the church will
end up being merely an echo chamber of the culture. While some attempt
to dialogue on the issues from their professional and pastoral
knowledge, as Harrison and Goddard and many others have done, they are
ignored since cultural agendas in society allow for no middle ground.
People are not allowed to take time to consider the evidence and remain
neutral, but are rushed into a decision that will hurt a lot of people
who want to seek Christian advice and God's help through pastoral
support and prayer.

For General Synod to enter this field and decide in the way it has done
is to shut the mouths of pastors, and ban prayer to God.

Churches who want to be in the Mainstream of Global Anglicanism and base
their understanding of truth on scripture, reason and tradition will no
longer trust the Church of England's decision making bodies, especially
when the House of Bishops completely rolled over, since the one vote
against was from a bishop who pressed the wrong button. Most Anglicans
all over the world will think General Synod is not fit for purpose.
These leaders will become marginal to global Anglicanism.

For their decision does not emerge from any recognised Anglican
theological tradition, professional expertise or settled scientific
study. It has emerged from fear of the opprobrium of society and of the
church's own social activists on this topic. What kind of church acts
out of being ashamed of Jesus and his words 'in this adulterous and
sinful generation" (Mark 8.38)?

This is not the end of the matter; it is not the beginning of the end,
it is the end of the beginning because the demands on the church to
conform with the culture will increase.

Canon Dr Vinay Samuel is a former General Secretary of the Evangelical
Fellowship of the Anglican Communion. Canon Dr Chris Sugden is Convenor
of Anglican Mainstream and a former member of General Synod



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

Message: 10
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2017 09:47:33 -0400
From: David Virtue <da...@virtueonline.org>
To: virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org
Subject: I can bless toilets but not gay marriages declares Bishop
Holtamc
Message-ID:
<1501854453.2469363....@webmail.messagingengine.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

I can bless toilets but not gay marriages declares Bishop Holtam
The Bishop of Salisbury seeks the truth in the understanding of marriage

By Mary Ann Mueller
VOL Special Correspondent
www.virtueonline.org
July 31, 2017

A call-in question from a Church of England priest on Saturday's BBC 4's
Any Questions? program was: "Fifty years after the partial repeal of
laws targeting gay men does the panel (Julia Hartley Brewer, Barry
Gardiner, Bishop Nick Holtam and Claire Perry) think the hierarchy of
the Church of England has failed in not embracing equal marriage in the
way we know the congregations have done?"

"I am puzzled. I'm allowed to bless toilets," Bishop Holtam prefaced.
"... and a bishop can bless a nuclear submarine, but I can't bless a
couple who love each other who are of the same sex ..."

His comment was met with chortling from a live audience.

"I do think that is bizarre," he continued and was met with applause.

Pressing on through the clapping, he said, "just look at the change that
has happened in the last 50 years since the decriminalization of
homosexuality."

He explained that the Church of England played a very significant role
in making the change in 1967 noting that he was sad that the CofE was
not still in the same progressive frame of mind and mood.

The Sexual Offences Act of 1967 decriminalized homosexual acts between
consenting males over the age of 21 in both England and Wales. It has
since been amended in 1994 (lowering the age of consent to 18); in 2000
(lowering the age of consent to 16); and in 2003 (overhauling the way
sexual offences are dealt with by the police and court system).

In 1967, Michael Ramsey was the seated Archbishop of Canterbury when
homosexuality was first decriminalized in England and a younger Queen
Elizabeth II was the reigning monarch and the Defender of the Faith. In
1994 and 2000, George Carey was Archbishop of Canterbury and in 2003,
Rowan Williams was ensconced in Lambeth. All the while, a maturing Queen
Elizabeth remained on the throne.

However, the Bishop of Salisbury said that there is now a broader
discussion running through the church and society on the subject of
homosexuality dealing with same-sex attraction, practice and marriage.

"When Jesus said: 'Where two or three are gathered in my Name,' I think
I have to listen closely to the other voices around me in order to try
to discern where truth lies."

The Bishop of Salisbury's see stretches back to 705 AD and St. Aldhelm,
the first Bishop of Sherborne, who was also the saintly Abbot of
Malmesbury. In fact, the line of bishops, which stretches for more than
1300 years from St. Aldhelm to Bishop Holtam, is peppered with saints
including: St. Heahmund (867-871 AD); ?lfwold II (1045-1058); and Saint
Osmund, who was the second Bishop of Salisbury (1078-1099).

There are also three bishops of London: Nicholas Bubwith (1407);
Humphrey Henchman (1660-1663); and Thomas Sherlock (1734-1748); three
archbishops of York: (John Piers (1577-1589); John Gilbert (1748-1757);
and Robert Hay Drummond (1761); and three archbishops of Canterbury:
Hubert Walter (1189-1193); Herbert Poore (1194-1217); and Henry Dean
(1501) in the See of Salisbury's pedigree.

Then in 2011, comes Nicholas Roderick Holtam, who says he is tasked with
discerning "where truth lies ... within a church community that is
formed by Tradition, Scripture and Reason."

Bishop Holtam was just becoming a teenager when the Sexual Offences Act
of 1967 was passed in late July by Parliament. Less than two weeks
later, Nick Holtam entered his teen years. He came of age during the
height of the Sexual Revolution of the Sixties and Seventies and the
launch of the Gay Rights Movement. This was the culture that socially
influenced him during his formative years.

The Salisbury bishop feels that free unfettered love is still a "hot
issue" in the Church and that his church, the Church of England, is
lagging behind post modern society and current culture in embracing the
entirety of the radical gay rights agenda and issues.

"It is really interesting to see where the center of gravity is moving
within the church," he said. "I think there is a sense where there is
quite a profound change going on and actually it is really important to
take the trouble to pray it, talk it, think it and test it before we
make that change that society made so easily."

He explains that it is the internal structure of the national churches
within Anglicanism, particularly the United Kingdom, which gives rise to
the differences in written regulations and living practice that allows
for the Church of England's understanding of marriage to differ from the
Episcopal Church of Scotland.

As such, a gay British couple can now travel to Scotland for a church
wedding and then return to England, where same-sex marriage has been the
law of the land since 2014.

In June, the Episcopal Church of Scotland (ECS) changed its canons on
marriage, thus allowing for same-sex marriage to be performed within a
church setting. The Scottish church follows on the heels of The
Episcopal Church (TEC) in the United States, which also redefined its
marriage canons at the 2012 General Convention throwing TEC's doors open
to same-gender blessings. In 2015 the US Supreme Court ruled that
marriage equality was to be legal in all 50 states and TEC, meeting in
Salt Lake City for General Convention, cheered.

"It's about the structure of the church within the United Kingdom and
there being different polities and different ecclesiologies," he
explained. "... and therefore the Episcopal Church in Scotland has made
a decision which the Church of England is not yet ready to make."

The Church of England bishop said he would have to respect the current
differences that compel couples to travel from his diocese to Scotland
to be married in the Scottish church, then return to England to live.

"It's not that people are being disrespected," he cautioned. "All people
are welcomed, all people are respected."

He said that currently, the overarching question is: "How do people
understand marriage in our society?"

"That's what the church is struggling with," he said explaining that he
is at "one end of that argument" -- the inclusive, liberal and
progressive end.

"But I have to listen closely to the people who disagree with me," he
said, "otherwise I'm not being true to myself and to the church and to
where I think truth is to be found."

However, the Bishop of Salisbury does openly admit that he doesn't
believe himself to be so arrogant as to believe that he is always right.

Mary Ann Mueller is a journalist living in Texas. She is a regular
contributor to VirtueOnline



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

Message: 11
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2017 09:48:09 -0400
From: David Virtue <da...@virtueonline.org>
To: "virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org"
<virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org>
Subject: LEAMINGTON, Ont: Anglican church opens doors to Muslim
worshippers
Message-ID:
<1501854489.2469408....@webmail.messagingengine.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

LEAMINGTON, Ont: Anglican church opens doors to Muslim worshippers
Relationship with Syrian refugees created strong bond between Christian
and Muslim communities

PHOTO: Muhammad Asghar, right, and Rev. Andrew Wilson of St. John the
Evangelist Anglican Church in Leamington, Ont. stand next to each other
during a Muslim prayer last week. The church rents space to the Muslim
community in order for them to have a mosque to pray in every week.
(Dale Molnar/CBC)

CBC News
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/
July 27, 2017

Muhammad Asghar kneeled on the floor alongside a couple of dozen fellow
Muslims last week silently praying. When he looked up and turned his
head, he smiled at the Anglican priest kneeling behind him.

"To my amazement, he came and joined me in the prayer," Asghar said.

A Christian clergyman kneeling inside a mosque would normally be an
unusual occurrence, but in Leamington -- the small farming community in
southwestern Ontario -- it's become a common sight.

Asghar and many others regularly pray at St. John the Evangelist
Anglican Church, where the Muslim community has set up a mosque, thanks
to a deal worked out between the two religious communities.

The emerging relationship between the groups can set an example for the
entire community, said Taha Halabi, who also regularly attends prayer.

"We tried to show the community in Leamington, and everywhere in
Ontario, that Muslims and Christians are hand to hand," he said.

The arrangement started in September when the church invited Syrian
refugees to its annual picnic. Everyone who showed up liked the
community hall, which is regularly rented out to a host of different
groups.

At the time, Rev. Andrew Wilson offered the space to be used as a mosque
after learning the Muslim community had been renting a tiny location
that was not big enough for their needs.

By the month of Ramadan, which started in late May, the hall was rented
to serve as a mosque, and hundreds came to worship during the time of
fasting. The mosque now regularly has 30 to 40 people coming in for the
prayer service.

For Wilson, the storyline smacks of the CBC television series Little
Mosque on the Prairie.

"It's almost the exact same story," he said. "That always makes me
giggle. We're kind of imitating art in a sort of way."

Learning from one another

Najam Jutt, who helps lead the prayers at the Leamington mosque, has
heard of other churches and mosques sharing locations in an effort to
help each other out.

"We absolutely love it," he said. "It highlights how we all work
together for a common cause."

When Asghar moved to Leamington from Toronto last month, he suspected
the small town would not have a place for him to pray.

"I was so concerned that we did not have a mosque here in this area," he
said. "I was amazed from the response from the church, response from the
community."

Parishioners at the Anglican church have welcomed their new tenants.
Charlotte McDonald has been going to St. John the Evangelist for more
than 50 years.

"We've welcomed refugees into our country as our brothers, sisters,
neighbours and friends, and this is an opportunity to invite them into
our church as well," she said.

She too hopes people in the region can learn from the example the two
communities have shown.

"We cannot gain peace in this world, until we can live together with one
another in one community," she said. "That's just reaching out and
saying here we are together -- brothers and sisters of this Earth,
regardless of religion, creed, colour, it doesn't matter."

END



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

Message: 12
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2017 09:49:02 -0400
From: David Virtue <da...@virtueonline.org>
To: "virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org"
<virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org>
Subject: What Ever Happened to the New Atheists
Message-ID:
<1501854542.2470001....@webmail.messagingengine.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

What Ever Happened to the New Atheists

by ELLIOT KAUFMAN
http://www.nationalreview.com/
July 28, 2017

Organized religion's shallowest critics made the mistake of blasting
Islam along with Christianity, and the Left crucified them for it. On
Friday, it became official: The New Atheists are no longer welcome on
the left.

Battered, condemned, and disinvited, these godless and once-favored
"public intellectuals" are now homeless, spurned by their erstwhile
progressive allies. Richard Dawkins, the famously skeptical evolutionary
biologist, was the last shoe to drop. He was disinvited from a speaking
engagement at Berkeley because his "comments about Islam" had "offended
and hurt . . . so many people," according to the event's organizers.
Dawkins is in good company. His New Atheist compatriots, Christopher
Hitchens and Sam Harris, had already been expelled from the party. In
both cases, insufficient deference to Islam was the proximate cause.
Hitchens remained a committed socialist, but felt a war on Islamic
terror and autocracy was needed. For this, he was denounced as a
"neocon."

Harris is a liberal, straight and true, but drew the ire of Reza Aslan
for refusing to except Islam from his broad critique of religion. "Islam
is not a religion of peace," Harris often says. In fact, he thinks it's
just the opposite. For that, everyone from Glen Greenwald to Ben Affleck
has cast him as an Islamophobe and a bigot. That means that three of the
much-acclaimed "Four Horsemen" of New Atheism have been turfed from the
left for extending their critique of religion to Islam. The fourth is
Daniel Dennett, who also criticizes Islam.

The only actual philosopher of the bunch, he is far too boring and
ponderous to be noticed, let alone denounced, by anyone. In his place,
one can add Bill Maher, a popularizer of New Atheism who has also been
barred from Berkeley over criticism of Islam. One by one, these men have
been excommunicated from the Left. Jeff Sessions: Under fire 00:11 00:44
What has happened? Why did the Left delight in seeing these men
ignorantly mock and vilify Christians, but denounce them when they
treated Islam the exact same way? Confirmation bias deserves at least a
part of the blame. The New Atheists have long harbored an irrational
fear of Christianity, but Christophobia doesn't worry the Left.

Combatting Islamophobia, however, is a progressive priority, and so it
is noticed and addressed when it strikes. None of this New Atheist
silliness bothered the Left so long as it flattered the right tribes and
battered the wrong ones. However, the argument that the liberal
obsession with Islamophobia stems from a healthy regard for the status
of minorities only goes so far. As Michael Walzer, the socialist
intellectual, has written in Dissent, "I frequently come across leftists
who are more concerned with avoiding accusations of Islamophobia than
they are with condemning Islamist zealotry." There is a reason, after
all, why many Democrats stubbornly and proudly refuse to say the words
"Islamic terrorism," preferring to speak of generalized "extremism."

But these same people who insist that evil men have perverted Islam are
usually the first to falsely bring up Timothy McVeigh as an example of a
"Christian terrorist." They present Christianity as a reflection of the
actions of its evildoers (and even those who disclaim the faith). But
the actions of orthodox Islamic believers, the Left suddenly maintains,
are no reflection on the tenets of the peaceful Islamic faith. Farther
left, the defense of Islam becomes a defense of Islamic radicalism and
intolerance.

Slavoj ?i?ek sees in Islamism "the rage of the victims of capitalist
globalization." Judith Butler insists that "understanding Hamas [and]
Hezbollah as social movements that are progressive, that are on the
left, that are part of a global left, is extremely important." These
voices cannot just be dismissed as aberrant: They are prominent,
fiercely secular left-wing intellectuals who find common cause with
Hamas -- which pushes gays off of buildings and stabs children in their
sleep -- and with Hezbollah, the "Party of God." In fact, they join a
long line of left-wing apologists for murderous anti-Western regimes.

Eric Hobsbawm, the renowned historian, refused to abandon the Soviet
Union, even after the tanks rolled through Prague. Professors Noam
Chomsky and Edward Herman spent years dismissing and minimizing reports
of a genocide in Cambodia as Western propaganda. Michel Foucault, the
postmodern philosopher, defended the indefensible cruelty of the Iranian
Revolution by claiming that Iran does not "have the same regime of truth
as ours. Clearly, the Left's problem is bigger than Islam. Any foreign
leader who can be seen as opposing Western, capitalist domination will
find some praise or at least rationalizations from progressives.

As Alan Johnson, the social-democratic political theorist, has written:
"The left is vulnerable . . . because it takes its cue from what it is
against rather than what it is for. In conversation with the Polish
anti-Stalinist dissident Adam Michnik in 1993, the liberal philosopher
Jurgen Habermas admitted "he had avoided any fundamental confrontation
with Stalinism." Why, asked Michnik? He did not want "applause from the
wrong side" replied Habermas. You have to read that twice, and then
think about the enormities of Stalinism, to realise just how appalling
it is. But Habermas was only expressing a piece of liberal-left common
sense. In short, the New Atheists have won applause from the wrong side:
the anti-Muslim, crusading Right. Christopher Hitchens, an endlessly
entertaining writer who could give it to Saddam Hussein as good as
anyone, was every right-winger's favorite radical. Sam Harris started
finding agreement with the likes of Douglas Murray and Ayaan Hirsi Ali.
Rich Lowry's defense of Harris from Ben Affleck appeared in the New York
Post. Bill Maher now delights the Right as much as he infuriates it.

And the Left, smelling traitors in its midst, simply cannot tolerate
this sort of transgression. But more attention is needed to the specific
nature of the Left's double standard when it comes to Islam. Why must
ardent secularists from the Islamic world like Ayaan Hirsi Ali -- the
type of people the Left looks to for inspiration in the history of
Western secularism -- be deemed bigots, while Sharia-supporting
conspiracy theorists like Linda Sarsour are cherished? Why has
criticizing Islam caused the New Atheists to cross a red line in the
progressive imagination? These positions make no sense if one thinks of
the Left as seriously secular, convinced of the need to end the reign of
superstition. But American liberals profess neither the passionate
skepticism of Hume nor the honest, urgent atheism of Nietzsche.

They prefer to embrace a shallow, culture-war atheism instead. This
culture-war atheism provides "evidence," quick and easy, to support the
proposition that America is split into two camps: the intelligent,
sophisticated, urbane, righteous liberals and the idiotic, gullible,
backward, bigoted conservatives. The former are atheists and the latter
are believers, flattering one side and bludgeoning the other. In fact,
it is this type of thinking that made progressives fall in love with the
New Atheists in the first place. New Atheism pleased the Left as long as
it stuck to criticizing "God," who was associated with the beliefs of
President George W. Bush and his supporters.

It was thus fun, rather than offensive, for Bill Maher to call
"religion" ridiculous, because he was assumed to be talking about
Christianity. Christopher Hitchens could call God a "dictator" and
Heaven a "celestial North Korea," and the Left would laugh. Berkeley
students would not think to disinvite Richard Dawkins when he was saying
"Bush and bin Laden are really on the same side: the side of faith and
violence against the side of reason and discussion." Truth be told, New
Atheism was always fundamentally unserious. It does not even try to
address the theistic arguments for the existence of God.

Indeed, philosopher A.C. Grayling insists that atheists should not even
bother with theology because they "reject the premise." Our new
"rationalists," it turns out, will not even evaluate arguments that do
not conform to their prejudices. Battering a fundamentalist straw-man
with an equally fundamentalist materialism, New Atheism is one big
category error. Over and over, its progenitors demand material proof for
the existence of God, as if He were just another type of thing -- a
teacup, or perhaps an especially powerful computer. This confusion leads
the New Atheists to favor the rather elementary infinite-regress
argument:

If God created everything, then who created God? But as the theologian
David Bentley Hart replies: [God is] not a 'supreme being,' not another
thing within or alongside the universe, but the infinite act of being
itself, the one eternal and transcendent source of all existence and
knowledge, in which all finite being participates. . . . Only a complete
failure to grasp the most basic philosophical terms of the conversation
could prompt this strange inversion of logic, by which the argument from
infinite regress--traditionally and correctly regarded as the most
powerful objection to pure materialism--is now treated as an irrefutable
argument against belief in God.

The rest of the New Atheists' arguments can be handled even more
quickly. Dawkins sees God as a complex superbeing subject to natural
evolution and then deems him to be statistically improbable. He may be
right, but why he thinks he has in the process critiqued anything
resembling "religion" is beyond me. Dennett, who endeavors mainly to
show that religion is a natural phenomenon, seems to confuse his
validation of a religious claim with its refutation.

Hitchens offers no real argument and plenty of historical inaccuracies.
He is generally content to list the bad deeds of believers, explain away
or ignore the good deeds of other believers, and then pretend that he
has somehow disproven Christianity. Harris, to quote David Bentley Hart
once more, "declares all dogma pernicious, except his own thoroughly
dogmatic attachment to nondualistic contemplative mysticism, of a sort
which he mistakenly imagines he has discovered in one school of Tibetan
Buddhism, and which (naturally) he characterizes as purely rational and
scientific."

None of this New Atheist silliness bothered the Left so long as it
flattered the right tribes and battered the wrong ones. It was only once
the New Atheists extended their critique of religion to Islam that
progressives began to turn on them. Muslims, though largely right-wing
before the War on Terror, had become a "marginalized group." Seen as the
victims of Western colonialism, neoconservative aggression, and
day-to-day discrimination, they became a part of the coalition of the
oppressed, which is to say, they became virtuous. Islam, consequently,
became a faith and tradition deserving of respect, not a "mind virus"
like Christiniaty, busy infecting fools.

As such, attacks on Muslims or their faith not only appeared to be
"punching down" at the innocent, but also became attacks on the left
itself. The New Atheists, merely by being consistent and focusing on the
most-egregious religious intolerance, in effect surrendered their
sophistication and, in the Left's eyes, joined the ranks of the bigoted,
reactionary Right. There is just one problem: We don't want them either.
-

Elliot Kaufman is an editorial intern at National Review.



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

Message: 13
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2017 09:49:22 -0400
From: David Virtue <da...@virtueonline.org>
To: "virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org"
<virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org>
Subject: It's official! Bishop Bruno's wings have been clipped
Message-ID:
<1501854562.2470044....@webmail.messagingengine.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

It's official! Bishop Bruno's wings have been clipped
As a matter of justice the Diocese of Los Angeles urged by Hearing Panel
not to sell St. James

By Mary Ann Mueller
VOL Special Correspondent
www.virtueonline.org
August 3, 2017

On August 2, the Title IV Hearing Panel looking into the "unfortunate
case" of beleaguered Los Angeles Bishop J. Jon Bruno issued its final
recommendation in the matter of "Conduct Unbecoming a Member of the
Clergy."

The crux of the 91-page document was highlighted in bold lettering.

"After hearing this entire unfortunate case and after prayerful
deliberation the Hearing Panel reaches a definite and clear conclusion,"
the crucial paragraph on Page 90 began. "The Hearing Panel strongly
recommends to the Diocese of Los Angeles that as a matter of justice it
immediately suspend its efforts to sell the St. James property, that it
restore the congregation and vicar to the church building and that it
reassign St. James the Great appropriate mission status."

There is it in black and white. The Diocese of Los Angeles is to stop
all attempts to sell St. James the Great and restore its displaced
congregation to its long-empty church. Canon Cindy Voorhees is also to
be restored as vicar and the congregation is to be given official
mission status by the diocese.

Bishop Bruno announced in May 2015 that he had plans to sell the church
because he wanted the money from the sale of the valuable Newport Beach
property to replenish his depleted diocesan coffers. Then in June he
tossed the viable and growing Episcopal congregation and its vicar out
of the church and locked the doors behind them.

The Hearing Panel determined that Bishop Bruno's "secret efforts" to
sell St. James have been the "heart of this case from the beginning."

It is the displaced congregation which first brought legal action
against their bishop in June 2015 to keep him from completing the sale
of their property to Legacy Partners and turning it into upscale
townhomes and then church brought Title IV charges against its him in
July.

"The details, and particularly the connection with the Anaheim property,
were revealed only through discovery," the Hearing Panel
explained."Bishop Bruno kept his most recent effort to sell the property
secret from the Hearing Panel."

The Hearing Panel saw through Bishop Bruno's deceptions.

"The Hearing Panel gave Bishop Bruno an opportunity to explain. He
objected. He obfuscated. He did not respond on the merits," the Panel
explained. "The Hearing Panel thus imposed sanctions, but also gave him
another chance."

The Panel also explained that the Los Angeles bishop tried to continue
to bamboozle them. The Trial of a Bishop was held in late March where
for three grueling days both Bishop Bruno and Canon Voorhees laid out
their cases before the five-member Hearing Panel for the entire church
to see.

Bruno then sought to put the Hearing Panel on terms: 'agree to
confidentiality or you do not get the information you want', he
threatened the Hearing Panel.

The Hearing Panel was not pleased. It had strong words for Bishop Bruno
and his underhanded, sleight-of-hand tactics. The members of the Panel
called Bishop Bruno's actions "disruptive" ... "dilatory" ...
prejudicial to good order and discipline ... discrediting the church and
the bishopric ... In short, they are "conduct unbecoming of a member of
the clergy, in clear violation of Title IV canons.

"Bishop Bruno's actions are contemptuous of the Hearing Panel, Title IV
and the Canons of the Church. They are disruptive. They are dilatory.
They infringe on the integrity of these proceedings. They prejudice the
good order and discipline of the Church. They bring material discredit
upon the Church and the Holy Orders conferred by the Church," the Panel
decreed. "They are material and substantial and of clear and weighty
importance to the ministry of the Church. They are Conduct Unbecoming a
Member of the Clergy. Canons IV.2; IV.3; IV.13.9."

The Panel found Bishop Bruno guilty as charged.

"The Hearing Panel finds that all the offenses committed by Bishop Bruno
are 'material and substantial or of clear and weighty importance to the
Ministry of the Church'." (Canon IV.3.3).

The Hearing Panel has broad authority. "Under the Canons the Hearing
Panel's task is not simply to determine whether Bishop Bruno has
violated the Canons. The Panel is charged with fashioning an appropriate
remedy."

The "remedy" the Hearing Panel decided upon is to suspend -- but not
depose -- Bishop Bruno for three years. It will be at least another two
months (60 days) before Bishop Bruno could be officially suspended. The
Episcopal News Service explains that 40 days after the August 1 order
was issued, the president of the Disciplinary Board for Bishops, retired
Bishop Catherine Waynick (X Indianapolis), then has another 20 days in
which to sentence Bishop Bruno as provided for in the order. However,
Bishop Bruno can appeal his sentence and, if he does, the sentence would
not be imposed during the appellate process.

"During the period of his suspension Bishop Bruno shall refrain from the
exercise of the gifts of the ministry conferred by ordination (Canon
IV.2, definition of "Sentence") and not exercise any authority over the
real or personal property or temporal affairs of the Church." (Canon
IV.19.7)

In part the gifts of ministry conferred by ordination of a priest and
consecration of a bishop include: baptizing, celebrating the Eucharist,
proclaiming the Gospel and preaching, teaching the faith, pronouncing
absolution, confirming, and ordaining new deacons and priests and
participating in the consecration of bishops.

The Hearing Panel explains: "After thorough and detailed consideration
of facts, positions, contentions, testimony and documents, the Hearing
Panel has concluded that the scope and severity of Bishop Bruno's
misconduct ... have unjustly and unnecessarily disturbed the ministry of
a mission of the Church," explaining that St. James the Great is a
casualty of Bishop Bruno's misconduct acting as diocesan bishop and Corp
Sole.

The Hearing Panel wonders "what might have happened if St. James the
Great had been allowed to continue its ministry in its church facility,
there is ample evidence of its viability and promise to convince the
Hearing Panel that St. James the Great was robbed of a reasonable chance
to succeed as a sustainable community of faith."

The Hearing Panel is hoping that the Diocese of Los Angeles' Standing
Committee coupled with the "supportive leadership" of its newly-ordained
Bishop-coadjutor John Taylor take an active part in the
"self-examination and truth-telling" which would lead to "justice,
healing, restitution and reconciliation" which are the "hallmarks" of
Title IV canons.

Title IV seeks to provide ways to promote healing, repentance,
forgiveness, restitution, justice, amendment of life and reconciliation
between an effected congregation, its bishop and the wider community
through a combination of placing restrictions on the bishop's exercise
of ministry and limit the bishop's involvement, attendance or
participation with the church and/or wider community.

"Otherwise, justice, healing, restitution and reconciliation, the
hallmarks of Canon IV.1, will not be possible in the long run in the
Diocese of Los Angeles, no matter what might be imposed from the outside
by force of canon," the Hearing Panel concluded.

Bishop Bruno not only received sanctions from the Hearing Panel,
Episcopal Presiding Bishop Michael Curry also weighed in with his own
set of restrictions.

On June 28 Bishop Curry issued a partial restriction of ministry against
Bishop Bruno forbidding him from selling St. James the Great property in
Newport Beach, California. Then on August 1, Bishop Curry upped the ante
and issued a further restriction to Bishop Bruno's ministry by striping
him of any and all episcopal authority -- secular, temporal, pastoral,
or ecclesiastical -- in any matter concerning St. James Church whether
it be its real estate, its congregation or its vicar.

The Hearing Panel also noted emphatically that its August 2 order does
not supersede the Partial Restrictions on the Ministry of Bishop Bruno
placed by the Presiding Bishop on June 28 and Aug. 1.

Bishop Bruno was elected Los Angeles' bishop coadjutor in 1999 and
consecrated bishop in 2000. He followed Bishop Frederick Brosch (V Los
Angeles) as the VI Bishop of Los Angeles in 2002. He is slated to
formally retired in 2018 when he turns 72 and Bishop Taylor is step in
as the VII Bishop of Los Angeles. So, when Bishop Bruno emerges from
serving his three-year
suspension he will no longer be the sitting bishop in Los Angeles.
Bishop Taylor, who was consecrated on July 8, would have advanced as the
bishop ordinary.

Following the release of the Hearing Panel's findings, Bishop-coadjutor
Taylor issued a statement defending Bishop Bruno's legacy. "Bishop
Bruno's 40 years of ordained ministry and 15 years as sixth bishop of
Los Angeles are not summed up by this order or the events that
precipitated it."

Bishop Herman Hollerith, IV (X Southern Virginia); Bishop Nicholas
Knisely (XIII Rhode Island); Fr. Erik Larsen (Rhode Island) and Ms.
Deborah Stokes (Southern Ohio) signed the Hearing Panel's order. The
remaining member of the Hearing panel, Bishop Michael Smith (XI North
Dakota), did not sign the Hearing Panel's order wrote a dissenting
opinion last month saying that after due consideration of the facts and
realizing that "both parties have ignored scriptural wisdom" he
recommended "that the matter against Bishop Jon J. Bruno be dismissed."

Mary Ann Mueller is a journalist living in Texas. She is a regular
contributor to VirtueOnline



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

Message: 14
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2017 09:50:11 -0400
From: David Virtue <da...@virtueonline.org>
To: "virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org"
<virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org>
Subject: Evangelicals: The missing piece in the Episcopal Church
Message-ID:
<1501854611.2470080....@webmail.messagingengine.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Evangelicals: The missing piece in the Episcopal Church

By Richard Kew
THE COVENANT
http://livingchurch.org/covenant/2017/07/25/evangelicals-the-missing-piece-in-the-episcopal-church/
July 25, 2017

Episcopal evangelicals are a species seldom seen these days. This isn't
new; on the American shore we've had a bit of a bumpy ride ever since
the 18th century, beginning with the departure of Methodists, and then
the independence of the American Colonies. Yet for much of the 19th
century evangelicals were the force to be reckoned with, until
Tractarians, Ritualists, and Rationalism became too much for them.
One-third of all congregations opted in favor of the newly formed
Reformed Episcopal Church.

While evangelical Anglicanism continued to flourish around the world,
until the 1960s classic evangelicals were barely visible here. This was
until the Fellowship of Witness came into being under the guidance of
Anglo-Australian scholar Philip Edgcumbe Hughes and Peter Moore, then
the Director of FOCUS (Fellowship of Christians in Universities and
Schools). John Guest and John Howe, both then at St. Stephen's,
Sewickley, Pennsylvania, were cheerleaders and a lot more. This
accelerated an evangelical renaissance: Trinity (Episcopal) School for
Ministry was founded, SAMS (now the Society for Anglican Mission and
Sending) came into being, and the Canterbury Trail was rapidly becoming
a well-trodden path.

Yet as the culture wars and sexuality battles came to a head in the
1990s, another exodus was precipitated. Departures were accelerated by
an ecclesial climate that denigrated evangelical Christianity as
dangerous fundamentalism entirely inappropriate within the American
Anglican fold. The 1870 Reformed Episcopal tragedy repeated itself amid
the 2003 events, with the preponderance of evangelicals making for the
exits. Leavers would occasionally glower back at those of us who
remained. For example, I was accused of being apostate, and of staying
just because I treasured my pension!

The evangelical cause in TEC had been set back to where it was before
the Fellowship of Witness. The relative absence of this productive
stream of global Anglicanism is one reason the Episcopal Church has
become a poorer and far less representative place. In most dioceses we
are considered to be undesirables. There is a catalogue of reasons for
this, but progressive attitudes tend to be Americo-centric both
culturally and theologically, which means ours is a denomination with a
limited understanding of worldwide Anglicanism despite living in an
increasingly global climate. The denomination sits light to creedal
Christianity in general and has all but forgotten its Reformation roots
in particular.

The seriousness with which evangelicals approach Scripture and its
authority is disdained as a mindless, na?ve, unreflective literalism. I
don't know how many times I have been told "people like you do not
belong in the Episcopal Church" by people whose theological credentials
on paper come nowhere near mine (and I am no scholar). However, those
who speak like this have little idea of the intellectual depth of the
Anglican evangelical tradition, nor do they know of the world-renowned
theological and biblical scholars that evangelicalism is continually
nurturing. By comparison the progressive agenda seems to me thin gruel.
It should be added that Anglican evangelicalism has over the last few
decades become much more than an Anglo-European phenomenon, and has done
much to encourage the intellectual life and scholarship of both the
Communion and the wider Church catholic in the Global South and beyond.
Encouraged along by the likes of John Stott, N.T. Wright, and Alister
McGrath, the African and Asian churches, for example, are nurturing new
generations of biblically-focused thinkers and scholars.

We evangelicals are easy to label as troublemakers, for our convictions
are deep and we refuse to play dead when Scripture is fumbled or the
cardinal doctrines of the Nicene faith are botched. Desiring to speak
Christ forcefully into an alien culture, we are unfashionably unwilling
to cooperate with the encroachment of secular postmodernism into the
church. If confronted, we dig in our heels, get nitpicky, become
uncooperative. Anglican evangelicals rejoice in being part of a
comprehensive church, but we are a leavening influence with a mandate to
challenge our ecclesial household to be faithful to its biblical roots,
as defined at the Reformation and mediated ever since within the global
Communion.

One misconception is that we are by nature non-liturgical. Nothing could
be further from the truth. Great evangelicals like Charles Simeon and
John Stott of England, Bishop Festo Kivengere from Uganda, and Bishop
Charles Pettit McIlvaine of Ohio were rooted and grounded in Scripture
and the classic Books of Common Prayer. We walk in their footsteps.
However, evangelical Anglicanism has historically preferred the simple
dignity of Protestant worship, although a younger generation in the
United States is comfortable with the ritual and ceremonial that only
became common in Anglican Christianity in the wake of the Oxford
Movement.

When it comes to worship, the most significant evangelical hallmark is
our assertion that God has called us to a ministry of both Word and
Sacrament. Preaching is our passion, especially the expository opening
of the Word of God to the people of God. Evangelicals have no more
patience with ill-prepared ten-minute homilies than we do with the
sloppy administration of the Sacrament of Holy Communion.

Most Episcopal evangelicals believe our Anglican province has lost many
of its bearings, as it has turned its back on its Reformation heritage
from which emerges a red-blooded biblical theology, accompanied by a
missional life and lifestyle. We are very much a corrective in the life
of the church. We are unapologetically evangelistic, ardently biblical,
intensely committed to the historic creeds, and at home within the
doctrinal parameters set by the Thirty-nine Articles of Religion. As an
evangelical Episcopalian, I believe the Articles deserve a far higher
profile than being a historic document relegated to the small print at
the back of the 1979 Book of Common Prayer.

Following 2003, Episcopal evangelicals found ourselves in limbo. Yet
reports of our demise have been greatly exaggerated. The message that
seemed to reach the church in the wider world was that we had all fled.
This is clearly untrue. The schism certainly thinned our ranks, but both
as clergy and laity we were far from scoured out. Certain dioceses still
boast a critical mass of the historically orthodox, while in other
places evangelical Episcopalians have managed to maintain a faithful
biblical witness.

As the 21st century begins to play itself out there is cause for
encouragement. I recently attended the annual gathering of the
Evangelical Fellowship of the Anglican Communion (EFAC-USA) in Orlando,
Florida, of which the Fellowship of Witness was the forebear. Not only
did TEC and ACNA Christians gather together for fellowship and faithful
reflection, but EFAC is being led and shaped by an exciting younger
generation of Episcopalians, many of whom are recent pilgrims on the
Canterbury Trail, and strikingly mature.

More than once there were allusions to Ezekiel's Valley of Dry Bones.
The question facing the entire Episcopal Church today is that posed to
Ezekiel: "Can these bones live?" (Ezek. 37:3). The answer to this
question in both Ezekiel's time and ours is in the hands of the Spirit
of God -- but I have a sense that in our little corner of God's vineyard
something new and encouraging is starting to happen. Don't count
evangelicals out for yet a while!



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

Message: 15
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2017 09:50:31 -0400
From: David Virtue <da...@virtueonline.org>
To: "virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org"
<virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org>
Subject: England's orthodox Anglicans: agreed on Synod's implications,
divided on what to do
Message-ID:
<1501854631.2471565....@webmail.messagingengine.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

England's orthodox Anglicans: agreed on Synod's implications, divided on
what to do

By Andrew Symes
http://anglicanmainstream.org/
August 1, 2017

General Synod was, it seems, a shock and a wake-up call to many people.
The decision-making body of the Church of England has voted,
unequivocally, to condemn the idea that people unhappy with their sexual
attraction, lifestyle or identity can seek professional or pastoral help
to move away from it. The leadership has rejected amendments to motions
which commend Jesus Christ and the teaching of the Bible to the nation
in a time of great difficulty for government, and it has asked the
Bishops to set in motion a process leading to the liturgical celebration
of gender transition. The Bishops appeared to be silent as those looking
to move the teaching and practice of the Church away from Christian
orthodoxy were feted as heroes, while those standing up for orthodoxy
were booed in the chamber and mocked on social media.

A number of theologically orthodox members who previously would have put
their faith in the political processes of Synod to prevent change in a
liberal direction are now admitting that in the area of sexuality and
gender the battle has been lost. While the doctrine of marriage itself
may not be changed for a while (the Archbishop of Canterbury would like
the Lambeth Conference of 2020 to feature at least a few non-Western
faces), in practice it is clear that boundaries are becoming blurred to
put it mildly. While those Bishops apparently known to be conservative
and evangelical were quiet during the Synod debates and even voted for
the controversial motions, other more liberal ones have publicly spoken
out in favour of same sex marriage, become patrons of Gay Pride, and
given permission for same sex relationships to be blessed and celebrated
in Cathedrals.

Among orthodox Anglicans in Britain, lively debates, both private and
public, are continuing about how to respond. They could be said to
coalesce around two basic positions in ways similar to last year's
debate on membership of the European Union: 'remain' or 'leave'?

There are those, mostly in senior leadership, who continue to be loyal
to the institution. Although they don't agree with some of the recent
decisions, they believe that the C of E is still the best vehicle for
communicating the Christian faith to the nation, and that those critical
of the Church's leadership are just as unhelpful as those driving
radical change.

Among those who see the C of E heading in a one-way revisionist
direction, there is a wide spectrum of views. An increasing number are
losing faith in the institution and its leadership, but believe that the
local church is the most important unit of ministry rather than the
Diocese, and networks of likeminded local orthodox C of E churches can
continue to operate bible-based ministry in ways which make use of C of
E administration, buildings etc, without having to follow the latest
theological fads. Some look to be on good terms with Diocesan leadership
but in practice look elsewhere for spiritual guidance and oversight, for
example Gafcon. A small but growing number have recently publicly
criticized their Bishops and essentially broken communion with them,
while remaining in the C of E.

These would be the 'reluctant remainers' -- like those who saw many
faults with the EU, that it couldn't be reformed from within, but that
it would be too difficult, complicated and costly to leave, and it would
be possible for the UK to live with the great benefits of some
compromises, for example being in the single market but not the single
currency.

But for others, such pragmatic compromise might be an option in politics
(or might have been before June 2016), but not in matters of church and
faith. While one could argue that most laity at the local level aren't
interested in what Bishops say or what Synods decide, when there will be
times when being part of a church institution which appears to be moving
away from a historic understanding of apostolic Christianity does create
problems of personal conscience and public witness. Is it worth
constantly expending energy fighting doctrinal battles with national
church, Diocese and Deanery, and educating one's congregation and PCC on
why our congregation should take a different approach? Some may be able
to shut out the controversial issues entirely, and just talk about Jesus
locally -- but others see this as a form of escapism. In the view of
this group, just as the apostles could not reform and bring Christ to
the centre of institutional Judaism but had to move out of synagogues
into homes, and just as Luther and the Reformers, and Wesley and the
Methodists had to establish new ecclesial structures, so something
similar is required today, it is argued. Not the forming of a new
denomination, but the emergence of a new brand of faithful Anglicanism
distinct and separate from the Church of England, the Church in Wales
and the Scottish Episcopal Church.

And then one can nuance it further: some 'remainers' and 'leavers' are
so committed to their cause that they have no time for the other side
and make this clear publicly even though doctrinally they believe the
same things. Others can see value in all the different views about
strategy and recognize their own position as provisional.

All of this is by way of answer to the recent article in Christian Today
by David Baker, asking "where is the Church of England Evangelical
Council when we need it?" Baker argues that, at this "fraught and
unsettled" time in worldwide Anglicanism, CEEC should be giving a lead.
He notes the various individuals and organizations which are part of the
Council (of which Anglican Mainstream is one), and suggests that this
group should be speaking clearly about current issues, and being a force
for evangelical unity within the C of E.

But the wide variety of responses from evangelicals to events at Synod,
and the spectrum of different strategies and tactics that are being
expressed from different groups, shows why CEEC cannot be expected to
unite all the orthodox groupings into a single body, or even speak with
one voice. People look back with nostalgia to the days of John Stott and
say that this happened under his leadership. But that's a simplistic
picture -- there were disagreements then about charismatic gifts, the
role of women and the place of social action in mission, among other
issues. And also, there is no John Stott figure today. CEEC some years
ago recognized this, and made a decision to be a forum of different
evangelical groups, rather than an organization speaking with a
particular party line. For some, the forum is not wide enough -- it
won't accept those who still refer to themselves as evangelicals though
they now take a liberal position on the sexuality debate. For others,
it's too wide -- it includes Bishops who voted for transgender liturgies
and against 'conversion therapies', and it includes those who are
supportive and critical of Justin Welby, and those who are pro and anti
Gafcon.

So while I don't blame David Baker for asking the question about CEEC,
it will not be able to provide the clear united leadership he asks for,
because it reflects the fissiparousness of English Anglican orthodox
evangelicalism. What it can do is ensure that those in the C of E
thinking about leaving and those committed to remaining, the loyalists
and separatists, the compromisers and purists, the optimists and
pessimists, reformed and charismatic, the young and old, the Jeremiahs
and Obadiahs keep talking to each other on the basis of the same
understanding of faith, even if their vision of the future and
strategies of how to get there are very different.

END



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

Message: 16
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2017 09:50:47 -0400
From: David Virtue <da...@virtueonline.org>
To: "virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org"
<virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org>
Subject: BELLS
Message-ID:
<1501854647.2471569....@webmail.messagingengine.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

BELLS

Duane W.H. Arnold, PhD
www.virtueonline.org
August 2, 2017

I've just returned from a brief business trip overseas that took me to
Paris. It is a city that I have grown to love over the past 30 years and
that I have visited, often for long periods of time, almost every year
during those three decades. While there, I often have the opportunity to
write and reflect. This year, those reflections were more focused as an
old friend at the Sorbonne asked me to meet with his post-graduate
seminar group to talk about the state of the American church and its
politics in light of the recent election, a subject that has been
extensively reported upon by European news outlets. Thankfully, I had
some materials near at hand, so a great deal of preparation was not
involved. As usually happens, however, sometimes the lecturer learns
more than the student in the process of teaching.

France, while culturally Roman Catholic, is a secular state. Churches
and, indeed, church institutions, receive few special privileges apart
from a certain measure of tax exemption. France is considered to be one
of the most irreligious of all countries. According to a survey
undertaken in 2010, a full 40% of the French population answered that
"they do not believe there is any sort of spirit, God, or life force",
with only 27% stating that they believe there is a God. The other 27%
believe that there is "some sort of life force or spirit". The remaining
6% "do not know". On any given weekend less than 5% of the country's
Roman Catholics will attend church. Protestants (mainly Reformed
evangelicals) make up less than 2% of the population, just behind the 3%
who are adherents of Islam. As an example of the secular nature of
French society, getting married in France is a wholly civil function
which takes place at a municipal office, while a subsequent religious
service (or none) is wholly the decision of the couple and the tenants
of their faith community. Since 2013, the same rules apply to same-sex
marriage.

It is clearly a different landscape than that of the United States,
which most French reporting portrays as "obsessed with religion".

All this was on my mind as I prepared to meet with the seminar group.
Although my French is less fluent than I could desire, the small group
of twenty-somethings around the table were patient and understanding. I
presented the latest figures from Pew Research on the state of the
Church in the US, referencing the decline of mainline denominations, the
apparent support of evangelicals for the current administration and a
range of other topics. Afterwards a lively discussion ensued. There
were, as always, a number of questions about the availability of
teaching positions in the US, as there are fewer and fewer posts
available in France. I then, sadly, had to inform them of the
difficulties being encountered by American universities and seminaries.

As we were preparing to end the session, I took the opportunity to pose
my own question to the seminar group. I asked, "What is the greatest
challenge you are facing?" Now, after the previous discussion, I was
expecting the participants to talk about tuition, teaching posts, etc.
After a bit of silence, however, a young man in the group spoke up and
said this,

"Dr. Arnold, we are facing the death of historic Christianity in Western
Europe. It is clear that this decline has spread to the United States
and the Western Hemisphere at large. Like a pandemic, the decline morphs
and changes as it spreads and then returns to its place of origin. The
evangelicals in the United States are "ahistorical", dependent not on a
reasoned or historic faith but on marketing models largely derived from
totalitarian propaganda systems which value only experience. You cannot
answer their claims, because the claims have no basis in either history
or reason. This kind of evangelicalism is also in Latin America and has
spread, returning to Europe in a virulent form. They will only allow the
"history" that bolsters not a reasoned or compelling argument, but only
a marketing statement. It is the religious equivalent of "Make America
Great Again". The worst part of this, is that like all marketing and
propaganda, it only lasts for a generation. At the end, we will be left
with nothing that speaks of an historic, reasonable Christian faith. We
are afraid, Dr. Arnold, that we might be the last generation to know
this faith, talking only to each other."

I carried that young man's reflection with me through the remainder of
my time in Paris and the flight home.

Earlier in the week, a thought had struck me, which I shared with a
friend. Through the kindness of a colleague, this year I was staying in
a condo carved out of a portion of the seventeenth century Musketeer
barracks in the midst of three churches and a religious based hospital
with a chapel and a carillon. In that condo, I constantly heard the
bells ringing out from the churches and the hospital chapel. It struck
me that for hundreds of years, people, ordinary people, would have known
what the various bells meant - the call to Church, the Angelus, the
Words of Institution, the end of church, etc. Today, however, although
the bells still ring, now no one knows what they signify (except for a
few antiquarians like me and a limited number of the faithful). It is
sort of like us - we say words to the world around us, but society no
longer knows what the words signify. We know the words (and argue about
them) but the world at large has no idea. We've become the bells -
sounding lovely and sacred, but devoid of meaning to a society at large
which has abandoned faith... as we keep speaking only to each other.

Duane W.H. Arnold, PhD is author of The Early Episcopal Career of
Athanasius of Alexandria (Notre Dame, 1991), Prayers of the Martyrs
(Zondervan, 1991) and is a member of The Project



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

Message: 17
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2017 09:51:50 -0400
From: David Virtue <da...@virtueonline.org>
To: "virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org"
<virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org>
Subject: THE BRUNO VERDICT: ECCLESIASTICAL TRIAL RAISES QUESTIONS
ABOUT THE CORRUPTION OF A DIOCESE
Message-ID:
<1501854710.2472155....@webmail.messagingengine.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

THE BRUNO VERDICT: ECCLESIASTICAL TRIAL RAISES QUESTIONS ABOUT THE
CORRUPTION OF A DIOCESE

By Phil Ashey
https://americananglican.org/current-news/bruno_verdict/
July 28, 2017

About the author: The Rev. Canon Phil Ashey, President and CEO of the
American Anglican Council, is a former member of St. James, Newport
Beach. His father was the parish rector from 1967-1985.

"For all have sinned and come short of the glory of God." Romans 3:23

"If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is
not in us. If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us
our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness." I John 1:8-9

"We are accounted righteous before God, only for the merit of our Lord
and Saviour Jesus Christ by faith, and not for our own works or
deservings." Article 11 "Of the Justification of Man," in The
Thirty-Nine Articles of Religion. (See also Art. 9 'Of Original or Birth
Sin')

The Episcopal Church (TEC) Disciplinary Hearing panel has decided to
suspend Bishop J. Jon Bruno of the Diocese of Los Angeles for three
years, upon the eve of his retirement. The panel found many of his
answers, and those of his top aides, misleading, evasive and
contradictory (Report at pp. 51-54 and 63-75). [1] He failed to exercise
his ministry in accordance with TEC Canons II.6.2-3 by failing to obtain
prior consent of the Diocesan Standing Committee to the sale of St.
James Newport Beach (Report at 55-62). He is guilty of conduct involving
dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation, in violation of TEC
Canon IV.4.1(h)(6) (Report at 63-75). He is guilty of conduct unbecoming
a Member of the Clergy, as defined in TEC Canon IV.2 (Report at 75-86).

The LA Times contacted the Diocese of Los Angeles for a comment. The
spokesman for the Diocese, Bob Williams, said in an email Friday July 21
that the diocese is withholding comment, "continuing their commitment to
respect the integrity of the [disciplinary] process, a priority that
Bishop Bruno has upheld through the duration of the two-year
proceedings."

And so, the patent, public misrepresentation continues, now from the
Diocese itself. The Hearing Panel condemned Bishop Bruno in the
strongest possible terms for not respecting the integrity of the
process:

"By contracting to sell the St. James property while the conflicts
involving the property were still under review and consideration by the
Hearing Panel, Respondent [Bruno] disrupted and interfered with the
integrity of the process of the Title IV proceeding... Bishop Bruno's
actions are contemptuous of the Hearing Panel, Title IV and the Canons
of the Church. They are disruptive. They are dilatory. They infringe on
the integrity of these proceedings...They are Conduct Unbecoming a
Member of the Clergy. Canons IV.2; IV.3; IV.13.9" (Report at 85-86).

Is the Diocese of Los Angeles living into an alternate reality? Is the
Diocesan spokesman trying to emulate Baghdad Bob whose grandiose and
grossly unrealistic broadcasts before and during the Iraqi war were
designed to mislead journalists and keep an embattled populace ignorant
of the facts? Clearly, the Diocese of Los Angeles seems to have
forgotten Paul's admonition in tears against those "whose glory is in
their shame." (Philippians 3:19)

When I searched the Diocesan website I couldn't find in any of the
pages, Bruno's biography, other staff biographies or news links about
the trial of Bishop Bruno, the verdict of the Disciplinary Hearing
panel, or his suspension. But I did find an unrepentant and robust
explanation of "The Bishop as Corporation Sole," the legal instrument
Bruno used to shield his questionable actions from any accountability.

As I reviewed the Disciplinary Hearing Panel Decision in the matter of
Bishop Bruno, its 106 factual findings representing 911 pages of
testimony from 13 witnesses and 100 exhibits, I was reminded of the
famous dictum of Lord Acton:

"Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely."

Lord Acton was a British historian of the late nineteenth and early
twentieth centuries who observed that a person's sense of morality
lessens as his or her power increases. Certainly, this extends to the
people who enable that person or leader to accumulate power. As the
leader's power increases and morality decreases, the power of their
supporters also increases while their conscience and morality decrease.
Without any moral compass beyond themselves, this often leads to
conspiracies and coups, as we see in so many secular utopian regimes (on
the right and the left) of the 20th and 21st, centuries.

Apart from the clarity and authority of God's word, the Bible, there is
no moral compass that will withstand the assault of secular utopian
ideologies, greed, lust for power, pride and a seared conscience. "The
law of the LORD is perfect, converting the soul," says the Psalmist:

"The testimony of the LORD is sure, making wise the simple. The statutes
of the LORD are right, rejoicing the heart: the commandment of the LORD
is pure, enlightening the eyes. The fear of the LORD is clean, enduring
forever; the judgments of the LORD are t rue and righteous altogether.
More to be desired are they than gold, yea than much fine gold: sweeter
also than honey and the honeycomb." Psalm 19: 7-10 KJV

If Bishop Bruno, his staff and the Standing Committee had heeded the
promise of such gold and sweetness in following God's word, their words
and deeds might have been different.

Instead, the Report of the Hearing Panel presents a pattern of data
points that are suggestive of moral and spiritual corruption focused on
gold of a lesser kind, the allure of possible profit of over $100
million that might have been obtained from the acquisition, development
and resale of commercial property in Anaheim--with the proceeds from the
sale of St James Newport Beach as the earnest money for a deal discussed
as far back as 2007 (Report at 10). Corruption is a good word to
consider in assessing the conduct of the leadership of a Diocese at
multiple levels. Corruption is defined as 1. (a) dishonest or fraudulent
conduct by those in power, (b) the action of making someone or something
morally depraved or the state of being so, and/or (c) decay,
putrefaction.

You see, this is not just the story of Bishop Bruno vs. St. James. This
is the story of how a whole Diocese has lost its moral compass and
compromised its right to be called a Church in any meaningful Biblical
sense of that term. It's important to understand the specific findings
of the Hearing Panel that it recounts in its Report to support its
verdict, because they suggest that a number of people exercising power
within the Diocese may have engaged in conduct that many would consider
dishonest or even fraudulent. The findings of the Hearing Panel suggest
that the consciences of those people were seared as they engaged in such
conduct, over many years, in support of Bruno. Whatever mission the
Diocese might have had at one point, it apparently decayed and putrefied
into greed. According to the Panel "Beginning at the latest in the fall
of 2014 Bishop Bruno and his key aides were secretly planning the sale
of St. James the Great, if they got the right price." (Report at 65). In
other words, they were planning to turn what was once a sacred space
into a real estate sale that would gain them funds "to purchase a
further interest in commercial property in Anaheim." (Report at 70). In
the words of Canon Voorhees, "it is not now the developer wanting the
building vacant, it is our own diocesan leadership." (Report at 46) So
it was the diocesan leadership that "evicted an active congregation,"
(Report at 46), locking their own people out of that sacred space so
that they could not even use it for funerals!

So, let's take note of the specific findings of the Hearing Panel

The Hearing Panel in its Report made the following findings that suggest
the corruption of some of Bishop Bruno's top staff:

? Ted Forbath, Chief Financial Officer of the Diocese, "grossly
exaggerated" the cost of litigation from actual expenses of $4.4m to $9m
by including staff expenses without any time sheets or documents to
support his estimate, among other things (Report at 12-13, 69). This
enabled Bruno to claim publicly and privately that the sale of St. James
was to recover costs of litigation, when in fact those costs had already
been recovered. (Report at 69)

? When Canon Cindy Voorhees, Mission Vicar of St James the Great,
was unintentionally tipped off to a possible sale by a phone call, she
called Treasurer Forbath and asked him whether "she was wasting her
time" trying to start a new Episcopal congregation, the Report indicates
that Mr. Forbath did not give her a straight answer, but instead told
her cryptically that he was "not going to get between a priest and her
bishop." (Report at 23, 52-53)

? She then called David Tumilty, Chief Operating and Executive
Officer of the Diocese who claimed no knowledge of the sale (Report at
23, 53)

? The Hearing Panel found that, with regards to a parking
agreement that would have provided substantial income and sustainability
to the mission congregation, "...the resolution was sitting on someone's
desk in the Diocesan Office." (Report at 24-25, 27 and 54) "It is clear
to the Hearing Panel that Bishop Bruno, Mr. Tumilty and Mr. Forbath
delayed signing the parking license agreement because they knew that if
there were an agreement, that would get in the way of their decision to
sell the St. James Property." (Report at 68)

? On June 29, 2015-- while the Mission Vicar was away from the
church- The Treasurer Forbath and Mission Administrator Clare Bangao,
with a locksmith, went to St James and changed the locks. COO Tumilty
notified Canon Voorhees that the locks had been changed and that she
would need to make arrangements to access the church to remove her
personal belongings. (Report at 46)

The Hearing Panel Report describes conduct by the Standing Committee
that in my opinion could be considered gross negligence, if not active
collusion, in the improper actions of the Bishop and his staff:

? In March 2009, the Standing Committee gave consent to the
transfer of St. David's North Hollywood and All Saints Long Beach to the
Corp Sole managed by +Bruno alone. For St James, there was no transfer
to Corp Sole and no approval of sale. (Report at 11)

? On April 10, 2015 Bishop Bruno entered a full, binding agreement
to sell the St. James property to a developer, without prior knowledge
or consent of the Standing Committee (Report at 31-32 and 57). Mr.
Tumilty's notes show that the intention was to use $6.3 million out of
the $15 million proceeds from the St. James sale to fund the Anaheim
purchase (Report at 34)

? On April 16, 2015 Suffragan Bishop Mary Glasspool called the
Rev. Melissa McCarthy, then President of the Standing Committee, and
asked her whether the Standing Committee had approved the sale. The Rev.
McCarthy was not aware, before this call, of the sale. Bishop Glasspool
urged Rev. McCarthy to oppose the sale and to talk with the chancellor
of another diocese. Instead, Rev. McCarthy informed Bishop Bruno that
Bishop Glasspool was trying "to undermine what the bishop diocesan was
doing." (Report at 32).

? The Standing Committee met less than a week later, on April 22,
2015. The minutes of that meeting do not mention St. James (Report at
32).

? The Standing Committee met on May 27, 2015. The minutes of the
meeting show that several items concerning St James were "brought
forward" to be brought to the attention of the Bishop. But the only
action concerning these items recorded in the minutes is that the
Standing Committee "shared with Bishop Bruno their understanding of his
reasons to sell the property in Newport Beach and will support
Corporation Sole's actions." (Report at 36). The minutes reveal no
inquiry by the Standing Committee of any transfer of St James to Corp
Sole.

? On June 8, 2015, the Standing Committee approved a motion "to
support Bishop Bruno in his endeavors with the sale of the Newport Beach
property, and to concur with his decision, acknowledging that the
Standing Committee has no jurisdiction over Corp Sole." This was a
special meeting called by the President, the Rev. McCarthy, at the
request of the Bishop. During testimony, Rev. McCarthy could not
remember reviewing any documents about the St. James sale at this
special June 8 meeting. (Report at 39)

The Hearing Panel stated unequivocally that prior review and approval of
the sale of church property by the Standing Committee "is a crucial part
of the fabric and polity of the Church." (Report at 57). And yet the
specific findings recited in the Hearing Panel's Report show that the
Standing Committee did little, if anything, to investigate the legal
ownership of St. James, to review any legal documentation for the sale,
and to refer to its own minutes in doing so. If they had, they
presumably would have discovered that the only properties transferred to
Corp Sole were back in 2009, and did not include St. James. They would
have discovered that a purported May 2014 quitclaim deed by the Diocese
to Corp Sole was without any review by the Standing Committee. If they
had followed Bishop Glasspool's advice and consulted with another
diocesan chancellor, they might have intervened and halted the sale.
Nevertheless, they did not

These detailed findings in the Hearing Panel's Report are troubling in
the extreme, to say the least. Viewed as a whole, the findings strongly
suggest that corruption and greed were systemic. They were not limited
to Bishop Bruno himself. Key staff and leaders at the highest levels
appear from the Report to have been complicit. The Standing Committee
appears to have failed to properly review, let alone check, these
problematic actions. Both laity and clergy close to the bishop were
apparently involved.

How could the Episcopal Diocese of Los Angeles end up with so many
people in positions of leadership who had lost their moral compass?

If the statement of the Diocesan spokesman and its webpage are any
signs, the absence of conviction, humility and repentance is not
promising.

But neither is the final judgement of the Hearing Panel. Despite the
recommendation of the Church Attorney (the Prosecutor, if you will) to
depose Bishop Bruno from ministry altogether and to recommend a forensic
audit of Corp Sole (Report at 84), the Hearing Panel declined to do so.
Instead, the Hearing Panel merely suspended Bishop Bruno for three years
on the eve of his retirement and the consecration of his successor. The
California Courts have held that Bishop Bruno still has the legal right
to sell the property. Is it possible for this suspended bishop to
continue to hold the Hearing Panel in contempt and proceed with a sale?
Yes, he might well be deposed for doing so, but how would that halt or
interfere with the sale?

Secondly, the recommendation of a forensic audit of Corp Sole would
certainly be in keeping with the Bible, in I John 1:7, where the apostle
says that "if we walk in the light as he is in the light, we have
fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus cleanses us from all
our sins." How strange that the Hearing Panel, which cites
reconciliation and healing as one of the "lofty Goals" of TEC Canon
IV.14.6, should ignore both the spirit and letter of I John 1:7 and the
obvious benefit of a forensic audit. After documenting Bishop Bruno's
disruptive, discrediting and dilatory actions (Report at 86), why on
earth would the Hearing Panel forgo a forensic audit of a multi-million
dollar account controlled by him?

Thirdly, despite the many findings of the Panel that give rise to
concerns of systemic corruption and greed, the Hearing Panel could only
recommend that the new Bishop and the Standing Committee "choose to take
part in a process of self-examination and truth telling around these
unfortunate and tragic events." (Report at 89, emphasis added)

Perhaps that is the most telling statement in the verdict: "these
unfortunate and tragic events."

The Panel could not bring themselves to say that this was sin, pure and
simple. What about the commandment against dishonesty: "Thou shalt not
bear false witness against thy neighbor" (Exodus 20:16)? As the source
of truth, God requires that His servants always speak truthfully. Under
God's inspiration, King David writes, "Lord, who may dwell in your
sanctuary? Who may live on your holy hill? He whose walk is blameless
and who does what is righteous, who speaks the truth from his heart and
has no slander on his tongue, who does his neighbor no wrong and casts
no slur on his fellow-man ... [and] who keeps his oath even when it
hurts." Psalm 15:1-3 God expects truth to permeate every facet of our
lives.

And yet this is precisely what Bruno, his staff, and the Standing
Committee did not do. Despite the Report's recitation of specific
findings that Bruno was not merely "silent" but actively, personally and
publicly lied about his plans to sell St James (at 66-67), among other
matters enumerated in detail (Report at 67-75), the Panel could only
find each instance a "misrepresentation, but not dishonesty, fraud or
deceit, within the meaning of Canon IV.4.1(h)(6)."

Is there any higher authority in the law of the Church than the Bible
itself? Is there any greater and more encompassing standard for
"dishonesty, fraud and deceit" than Exodus 20:16? Any higher or greater
standard for servant leaders than Psalm 15:1-3?

When the leadership of a Church loses its moral compass, it is
invariably the result of abandoning the clarity and authority of God's
word, the Bible. Often it begins in practice rather than principle. The
Church loses faith in Jesus Christ and his loving authority to bring us
to grace-filled conviction, repentance and transformation from the
inside out. Too often the Church exchanges the truth of God's word and
the uniqueness of Jesus Christ in a multi-faith society for some other
"truth." It may be an exchange of mission--from making disciples of
Jesus Christ of all nations (Matthew 28:16-20) to "radical inclusion and
justice." St Augustine would say that even such an exchange for a lesser
good is the heart of sin; the deprivation of the good in Christ alone.

But in this case the Church lost its moral compass over money. It's not
just tragic and unfortunate. It's sin. And the only remedy for the sin
sick is conviction of that sin, humble repentance and recommitment to
Christ and his word alone. Only Christ can restore a seared conscience.

________________________________________

[1] This and following references are taken directly from the TEC Draft
Order of the Hearing Panel In the Title IV Disciplinary Matter Involving
The Rt. Rev. Jon Bruno, Respondent, published June 17, 2017, at the
pages of the Draft Order cited in the parentheses. Direct quotations
from the Draft Order are also indicated with quotation marks, for
accuracy.

Phil AsheyThe Rev. Canon Phil Ashey is President & CEO of the American
Anglican Council



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

Message: 18
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2017 09:56:14 -0400
From: David Virtue <da...@virtueonline.org>
To: "virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org"
<virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org>
Subject: Leaving the denomination
Message-ID:
<1501854974.2472656....@webmail.messagingengine.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

Leaving the denomination

By Edward Lobb
http://anglicanmainstream.org/leaving-the-denomination/
Jul 27, 2017

In 2012, the Tron Church in Glasgow City Centre, to which I belong, took
the difficult decision to leave the Church of Scotland. In this short
article I hope to describe something of the experience our congregation
went through, and something of what it feels like five years on, in
2017. My own background is that I was ordained in the Church of England
in 1976, and served in regular parish ministry (two curacies and two
incumbencies) until 2005, when I moved to Scotland to set up and run the
Scottish Cornhill Training Course. I still teach at Cornhill, and serve
as an honorary associate minister at the Tron under the leadership of
Willie Philip, who has led the church since 2004.

The Church of Scotland [Presbyterian], much infected by liberal theology
like the Church of England [Anglican], had been moving towards the
sanctioning of same-sex relationships for years; and when its General
Assembly made certain clear decisions, we decided that we could no
longer remain in fellowship with it. Willie Philip had been preparing
the congregation over several years with clear teaching from the Bible,
so that throughout the congregation there was a great unity of
understanding of the issues involved. This meant that when we took the
decision to depart from the Church of Scotland, ninety-nine percent of
the congregation remained together: only a handful of people dissented.
It was a painful business: the CofS authorities put intense pressure on
us and expressed fierce antagonism, and not a few people from other
evangelical congregations strongly opposed our decision. But our
departure has been an enormous blessing to us: we feel like the Ancient
Mariner when the albatross finally dropped from his neck.

Overwhelmingly, our departure has brought us a sense of relief. We are
no longer attached to and supervised by a presbytery (rather like a
diocesan synod) in which we had to "work together" with
non-evangelicals. There is no more battling over money and staff
allocations and buildings; no more paying large sums into central
denominational funds for the purpose of sustaining churches where no
gospel work is done. No more is there the depressing knowledge that we
are serving a great bureaucratic money-consuming structure which is much
corrupted by liberal theology and bad behaviour. We are now free to get
on with our proper work, the kind of work exemplified in the New
Testament: evangelism, preaching and teaching the Bible, caring for the
church family, supporting good overseas work. We are still involved in
battle of course! -- battle with the world the flesh and the devil in
our hearts and in other people's; but the draining, depressing struggle
with a structure whose aims we do not share is over.

It was surprisingly painless to leave our church building, a fine early
19th century church in an excellent position in the city centre. We had
very recently refurbished it beautifully at a cost to the congregation
of nearly 2 million pounds, but we decided to walk away from it rather
than fight a legal battle over it with the Church of Scotland, a battle
which we would probably have lost and which would have soaked up much
energy and created bitterness in our own hearts.

And the gospel work has been blessed since our departure from the
denomination: in 2016 we were able to open two new centres of activity
in two previously existing church buildings, one about a mile to the
west of our central building, the other in the southern suburbs of the
city. We also have more than 150 Iranians with us every Sunday and have
baptized many dozens of them in the last couple of years. Looking after
them is a stretching challenge, and about 30 of our members now work
together as a team, teaching and discipling them and helping many with
asylum and residence applications.

We're well aware of the dangers involved in becoming an independent
congregation: the dangers of unaccountability, isolation, and pride in
what we have done. To guard against all this, we have a Council of
Reference consisting of about six senior men (from Scotland, England and
further afield) who keep an eye on us lest we should misbehave; and we
are constantly and actively cultivating good relationships with a number
of evangelical churches in the fairly new West of Scotland Gospel
Partnership. In addition, Willie Philip and others have recently started
a connection for churches like our own which have left the CofS. This is
known as the Didasko Fellowship, and its purpose is to enable our
churches to offer each other some mutual oversight: regular meetings of
ministers and their wives to provide loving support, and opportunities
to help each other in various ways, including identifying future leaders
and providing training for them. But we are not starting a new
denomination, nor setting up any kind of mutual financial arrangements.
To do that might be to create a new albatross.

Doctrinally, we have adopted a constitution very similar to that of the
Church of Scotland, with the Bible as our rule of faith and the
Westminster Confession of Faith our subsidiary standard. We think of
ourselves as fundamentally Presbyterian, and express this identity in
the setting up of the new Didasko Presbytery. On the pressing
contemporary questions concerning sexuality and transgenderism, our
stance is determined and non-negotiable: we stick with the Bible's
teaching and are unashamed of it.

We're grateful to God that ours is a happy, united and active church. We
had to make the break, and it has been a great blessing to the gospel
work at the Tron Church.



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

Message: 19
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2017 09:57:07 -0400
From: David Virtue <da...@virtueonline.org>
To: "virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org"
<virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org>
Subject: The Mythical Middle
Message-ID:
<1501855027.2473264....@webmail.messagingengine.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

The Mythical Middle

By Peter Jensen
www.gafcon.org/
3rd August 2017

It has not worked. It cannot work. It will not work.

I mean the idea that we will be able to find a middle ground, where we
will be able to be quietly or relatively conservative, while allowing
for a denominational variety which blesses sexual relations outside the
bonds of traditional marriage.

The present tactic of those looking for a change is to say that there is
a middle way, in which you can reject the development but still remain
'under the radar' within the church, holding your point of view but not
making a fuss.

Or, perhaps, it is possible to be 'balanced' or 'moderate' by rejecting
same sex marriage, but at the same time to endorsing sexual
relationships outside of marriage, commenting on how rich and how
pleasing to God they are.

In this way, you can avoid being 'an extremist'. Of course, 'extremist'
is such an ugly word that no one wishes to accept the label. We much
prefer to have the good judgement that enables us to be in the middle of
any dispute, seeing the good on both sides but not turning the argument
into a matter of mutually exclusive choice between two options.

Notice how the strategy of creating a false middle occurs. It appeals to
the natural human desire to be supposedly rational in thought, calm, and
fair. There is a belief that the truth in any matter is not at either
'extreme', but inevitably in the middle and if we occupy the middle
ground we cannot go too far wrong.

People with a product to sell often play off this instinct. They don't
offer us two sizes of coffee cup -- they offer three, knowing that most
of us will choose the middle and pride ourselves on being moderate. What
they do not tell us is that the middle choice suits them commercially as
this is where the best profit margin will be.

But it is not just in buying and selling. How many times are we told
even in Christian communications that we have a choice between the
over-emphasis of one side and the over-emphasis of another and that if
we stick to the convenient middle, all will be well?

Think. What if the truth is actually on the boundary and not in the
middle? What if there is no middle, but the choice is binary, and the
middle is a mythical middle?

For example, imagine a denomination in which some ministers teach that
Jesus was a merely good man and others teach that he is both true God
and true man. Where is the moderate, middle view here? Would it be to
say that Jesus is divine but not fully God? We can hear all the
arguments in favour of this moderate position -- but we know that it is
actually heretical.

By using the word 'extremist' for those who hold a strong point of view,
who make a stand, we excuse ourselves from the need to think, to make a
decision, to act. Or we give ourselves permission to bless what God
calls sin because it is not the most extreme form of such an activity.
Or we acquiesce without protest in the activities of others doing this,
in our name.

But in the present case, there is no middle. We are faced with a choice
between the teaching of scripture backed by the continuous
interpretative tradition of the church catholic, and a shift from
scripture into what God disapproves of.

Thus, it is no good hiding behind the mantra that the Church has not
changed the doctrine of marriage, if at the same time we are praying
with and for same sex couples in a sexual partnership. The latter shift
appears relatively small, but, in fact it is the major change. Same sex
marriage is not the extreme. Entertaining the validity of sexual
relations outside of marriage at all is the 'extremist' position, if you
must use such a word.

You may not yourself agree to prayers for same sex unions, but the mere
fact that you make no protest, enter no caveat, run up no flag, means
that you are accepting a revolutionary change in your church in the name
of moderation. But this is not moderation -- it is capitulation.
Ultimately, it makes it impossible to retain the authority of the Bible
and the integrity of the gospel.

Be careful of the Mythical Middle -- it is in fact a Misleading Muddle!

Dr. Peter Jensen is General Secretary of GAFCON



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

Message: 20
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 2017 09:57:42 -0400
From: David Virtue <da...@virtueonline.org>
To: "virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org"
<virtue...@listserv.virtueonline.org>
Subject: KINDNESS: What Does it Mean to be a Mature Christian
Disciple? - Luke 6:37-45
Message-ID:
<1501855062.2473282....@webmail.messagingengine.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"

What Does it Mean to be a Mature Christian Disciple?
7. KINDNESS/GOODNESS (Luke 6:37-45)

By Ted Schroder,
www.tedschroder.com
August 6, 2017

William Penn wrote, "I expect to pass through life but once. If,
therefore, there be any kindness I can show, or any good thing I can do
to any fellow being, let me do it now, for I shall not pass this way
again." Someone said, "Be kind to everybody. You never know who might
show up in the jury at your trial."

A poor boy who was selling goods from door to door to pay his way
through school was down to his last penny and was hungry. He asked for a
drink of water from a young lady and she brought him a large glass of
milk. He asked, "How much do I owe you?" She replied, "You don't owe me
anything. Mother has taught us never to accept pay for an act of
kindness." Years later when she was admitted to hospital with a rare
disease a specialist was called in for consultation. He recognized her
at once and worked hard to help her. Dr. Howard Kelly asked the hospital
to pass the patient's bill to him for approval. He looked at it, then
wrote something on the edge, and the bill was sent to her room. When she
opened it she read these words: "Paid in full with one glass of milk."

Jesus taught, "Give and it will be given to you. A good measure, pressed
down, shaken together and running over, will be poured into your lap.
For with the measure you use, it will be measured to you" (Luke 6:38).
There is a reciprocity in the affairs of life. We get back what we put
into life. The mature Christian disciple is like his teacher. Everyone
who is fully trained by Jesus will be like him. Jesus did good by
responding to the needs of those around him. The apostles did good by
showing kindness to the sick and the needy.

Kindness and goodness are the characteristics of God as revealed in
Jesus. God, by definition, is the summum bonum: the chief good, the
highest good. "God shows us his kindness in coming to save us not
because of righteous things we had done but because of his mercy. He
saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit,
whom he poured out on us generously through Jesus Christ our Savior"
(Titus 3:4-6). The kindness and goodness of the Holy Spirit is given to
change our hearts from being unkind, cruel and evil, as seen in our
critical nature, to being kind, nonjudgmental, forgiving, and
self-aware.

Jesus tells us that we are not to judge, not to condemn people, not to
hold grudges against people for the reciprocity in the affairs of life
can boomerang on us. We can be judged, we can be condemned, we can be
unforgiven if we don't watch out. If we are unkind and wish evil of
people, we will suffer the consequences. We can be hypocrites in
identifying the specks of sawdust in the eyes of other people and pay no
attention to the plank in our own eye.

The problem lies in our own sinful nature. There are good trees and
there are bad trees. They bear the fruit of their own nature. "The good
man brings good things out of the good stored up in his heart, and the
evil man brings evil things out of the evil stored up in his heart. For
out of the overflow of his heart his mouth speaks" (Luke 6:45).

How can the heart be changed by the Holy Spirit to be kind and to do
good? How can the critical person become an affirming person? How can we
think the best of people rather than the worst? This is a besetting sin
in politics and in religion. We can be most unkind of our political and
theological opponents. Cartoonists can be vicious. Commentators and
satirists can encourage a culture of unkindness. Frederick Faber has
written that "it is harder for a clever man to be kind, especially in
his words. He has the temptation to say clever things; and somehow,
clever things are hardly ever kind things. There is a drop of acid in
them."

This also a problem in families and in education. Parents and
schoolteachers can be unkind, abusive and cruel.

If children live with criticism,
They learn to condemn.
If children live with hostility,
They learn to fight.
If children live with ridicule,
They learn to be shy.
If children live with shame,
They learn to feel guilty.
If children live with encouragement,
They learn confidence.
If children live with tolerance,
They learn to be patient.
If children live with praise,
They learn to appreciate.
If children live with acceptance,
They learn to love.
If children live with approval,
They learn to like themselves.
If children live with honesty,
They learn truthfulness.
If children live with security,
They learn to have faith in themselves and others.
If children live with friendliness,
They learn the world is a nice place in which to live.
Copyright ? 1972/1975 by Dorothy Law Nolte

We have to learn to store up good things in our hearts rather than evil
things. It means cultivating the attitude of gratitude. Being thankful
for how the Lord has blessed you rather than being envious of others. It
requires suppressing the desire to get even by repaying evil with evil
and insult with insult but with blessing. It means praying for others
rather than resenting them. "It is better, if it is God's will, to
suffer for doing good than for doing evil. For Christ died for our sins
once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring you to God" (1
Peter 3:17-18).

None of us is good. There is no one good except God. Read Romans 3:9-20.
We all need to have our hearts changed by the Holy Spirit. If we want to
become mature Christian disciples we will seek to find our highest good
in God, and find ways to be kind to our neighbors. "Be kind and
compassionate to one another, forgiving each other, just as in Christ
God forgave you" (Eph. 4:32).



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

Subject: Digest Footer

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


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

End of VirtueOnline Digest, Vol 17, Issue 29
********************************************