|
"I, even I, am the Lord, and besides Me there is no savior." Isaiah 43:11 NKJV
|
|
|
|
|
|
Message from Bishop David Anderson
|
 | |
Bishop Anderson
|
Dear Brothers and Sisters in Jesus Christ, As we prepare for Palm Sunday and Holy Week, the transition from the "Hosanna's" of the palm-strewn road to the grief of the Via Dolorosa becomes quite jarring. Although it all was within God's larger plan for our redemption, the betrayal of Jesus by one he trusted, the crowds shouting "crucify him," and his treatment at the hands of the soldiers, even to his death, leaves us wanting and needing the good news that the tomb is empty and Jesus is alive. I think betrayal by someone you trust is particularly hurtful. Clergy, attorneys, teachers, doctors, and bankers are all supposed to assist you within their professional relationship, hence when one is betrayed or defrauded by a priest, pastor, attorney, teacher, doctor or banker it is arguably worse than a robber simply sticking a gun in your ribs and demanding your money. This brings to mind the relationship that bishops and clergy have, and the lack of trust that can develop. In the increasingly totalitarian culture of The Episcopal Church (TEC) - a culture which brought you the new Title IV Disciplinary canons which afford no due process, no right to a trial, and, for priests, no right to face your accusers - the bishops of TEC have borrowed a page out of Alexander Solzhenitsyn's "Gulag Archipelago." In that great work, the Soviet government accused dissidents and malcontents of "mental illness," and then shut them away in the gulags under the guise of psychiatric treatment for mental health. The reasoning was that anyone who opposed the Soviet government and culture must be crazy. That same reasoning seems to have infected the minds of some TEC bishops. For the last seven or more years, TEC has had in its playbook a process for getting rid of troublesome conservative priests. Over these years, the AAC has quietly counseled with many of the priests as they discovered that their bishop, feigning genuine concern for the priest, was working to deftly remove him.
|
|
|
|
The betrayal usually starts with a liberal revisionist bishop and a conservative parish and priest. The bishop's plan is to remove the priest, put a liberal priest in as an interim rector, drive away the more conservative parish members and reshape the beliefs of those that remain. Step one is a phone call to the priest.
Someone in the bishop's office phones the priest and says the bishop wants to schedule an appointment to see him as soon as possible, no clues given as to the reason for the meeting. When the meeting takes place, the bishop says that he has received several phone calls from parishioners who are worried about the priest and his emotional health. Feigning concern, the bishop tells the priest he wants him to meet with the diocese's psychologist or psychiatrist, to establish a base line and see how the diocese can help. If the priest resists, he is given a "godly admonition" to do it, on pain of discipline if he refuses. This is a trap, and unless the priest follows a defensive plan immediately, he is toast - burned toast.
The priest meets with the bishop's psychologist or psychiatrist, who then finds what the bishop wants: emotional fatigue, depression, and some sense of imbalance. The priest asks for a copy of the report but is refused on the grounds that the bishop has labeled it confidential and the priest will have to discuss it with the bishop, who also refuses him a copy. The bishop says he wants to protect both the priest and the congregation, so he temporarily suspends the priest from active duty ("Administrative Leave" under the new Title IV canons), requires the priest to undergo therapy and rest and stay away from the church, meanwhile appointing an interim priest to reshape the congregation in the original priest's absence. Months drag on and the priest will never return to that church.
What should you, the priest do in this situation? When the bishop asks you to meet with a psychologist/psychiatrist, you should agree to the meeting, but schedule it, and if necessary reschedule it, far enough out for you to quickly approach a non-biased psychiatrist and ask for a full psychiatric workup. Time is of the essence - this needs to be done before the meeting with the bishop's appointed psychiatrist.
Assuming that the non-biased psychiatric workup is reasonably favorable, keep a copy in your possession. Also have in your possession a copy of the HIPPA regulations concerning patients' rights and penalties for non-compliance; the AAC can help you get a copy if necessary. When you meet the bishop's mental health evaluator, after the interview and testing is completed, ask for a copy of his evaluation to be sent to you. If/when he or she refuses, remind the doctor of the HIPPA requirements, and pull out your copy with appropriate lines highlighted. At that point, also mention that you have just recently had a complete psychiatric workup at your request, and would the doctor like a copy of that?
If the bishop's doctor writes an unfavorable mental health evaluation, advise the doctor and the bishop that in light of the previous evaluation you wish to have the two reports reviewed by a non-biased, mutually agreed-upon doctor. If the bishop and the doctor don't agree, advise the bishop and the doctor that you intend to file a grievance with the licensing board naming both of them. The real intent is to block the bishop's further punitive action against you, but the only way to do this is from a position of preparedness and strength.
Sadly, these tactics are still being used in the United States today, and priests have to be careful. If your sermons are recorded and if you email, blog, tweet and text, things that you say or write will travel far and fast.
For all of my readers who have a godly and just bishop, give especial thanks to God this Holy Week. You can take part in the renewal of ordination vows in Holy Week without crossing your fingers or wondering if the bishop has you on his short list for a gulag.
Faithfully in Christ,
+David
The Rt. Rev. David C. Anderson, Sr.
President and CEO, American Anglican Council
|
Chaplain's Corner
|
 By The Rev. Canon Phil Ashey
Chief Operating and Development Officer, American Anglican Council
A New Covenant - One we can depend on
"'The time is coming,' declares the LORD, 'when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah. It will not be like the covenant I made with their forefathers when I took them by the hand to lead them out of Egypt, because they broke my covenant, though I was a husband to them,' declares the LORD. 'This is the covenant I will make with the house of Israel after that time,' says the LORD. 'I will put my law in their minds and write it on their hearts. I will be their God and they will be my people...'" (Jeremiah 31:31-34)
Dear Friends in Christ,
The Anglican Covenant is dead - or at least dead in the water throughout the Anglican Communion. On Saturday, March 24, the mother church of the Anglican Communion, the Church of England, voted by a majority of dioceses to reject the proposed Covenant that was designed, in some sense, to hold the worldwide Anglican Communion together amid divisions over homosexuality and same sex unions.
The proposed Anglican Covenant was the institutional response to the unilateral decisions of The Episcopal Church (TEC) and The Anglican Church of Canada (ACoC) to consecrate a partnered homosexual priest as a bishop of the church (TEC) and to proceed with further consecrations, and to bless same sex-unions in flagrant violation of Biblical and Anglican Communion teaching against such actions (1998 Lambeth Resolution 1.10 ). Direct and meaningful discipline of TEC and ACoC was postponed again and again, despite the call of the Primates Meeting in 2006 in Tanzania, in order to pursue the Anglican Covenant process. The covenant was first proposed in 2004 as the principal outcome of the Windsor Report. For eight years the Archbishop of Canterbury has made this the hallmark of his leadership, despite at least three occasions which I wrote about last week and mentioned in our Anglican Perspective where he directly or indirectly derailed the Covenant process himself. For eight years, enormous time, effort and money has been spent in good faith by many leaders and provinces of the Anglican Communion to consider this Covenant. Now there is very little reason for other provinces to sign the Covenant, because the mother church of the Anglican Communion will itself no longer be in the "first tier" of Anglicans supporting the doctrine and discipline meant to hold the Communion together.
I am reflecting on this failure in the light of Jeremiah's prophecy of the "new covenant" in chapter 31:31-34 (above) from last week's lectionary, and in light of the covenant promises that Jesus fulfilled when he went to the Cross - promises we are about to recollect painfully this Holy Week. In the Bible, that word "covenant" stands for God's pattern for promises that you and I can depend on. In the Old Testament, a covenant required a person to represent or "stand in" for each party, a sacrifice, the shedding of blood, mutual honoring of the covenant promises, and above all, someone to take the initiative.
Israel and Judah simply failed to keep their end of the bargain - and it was a bargain, because it was God who always took the initiative as the stronger party! In every covenant case, from Adam to David, people just like you and me could not, would not and did not live up to their promises. They sinned. They followed other gods. They insisted on living their lives the way they wanted to apart from God's laws.
I believe the failure of the Anglican Covenant is a case in point but even more profound, because the initiative lay with the Archbishop of Canterbury - whose leadership was compromised by the manipulation of inter-communion politics and the lubrication of the Anglican Communion Office by money from TEC (see our report on Indaba). The leadership of TEC and the ACoC insisted on leading their churches and people "prophetically" apart from God's written word and Communion teaching on human sexuality and holy orders. Of course, those were merely the presenting issues. The deeper issues involve the essentials of the Christian faith: is Jesus Christ the unique and universal savior of the whole world? Is he "the way, the truth, and the life" (John 14:6), or merely "a way," or "a vehicle to the divine"? TEC and the ACoC were not willing, and remain unwilling, to sacrifice by halting their trajectory of consecrating partnered same-sex persons for holy orders and their blessing of same-sex unions. Indeed, they have accelerated the pace and are trying to spread it now to the rest of the Communion.
What made the promises of the new covenant of Jeremiah 31 trustworthy and real? Jesus Christ. For he was the representative who stood in for you and me on the Cross. He sacrificed his life, and shed his blood, to cover your sins and mine. He took the initiative for you and me, in accordance with the Father's plan from the beginning of time. The "new covenant" is a promise of new beginnings, new life from the "inside out" (Jer. 31: 33), new freedom from the failures of the past and new freedom to obey the LORD from our hearts (31:34).
In less than a month, 200 leaders from all over the Anglican Communion will gather in London for a conference sponsored by the global Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans (FCA). Every leader has affirmed The Jerusalem Declaration. Every leader affirms the goals of the FCA: the proclamation and defense of the Gospel throughout the world (especially in and through Anglican churches) and the provision of aid to those faithful Anglicans who have been forced to disaffiliate from their original spiritual homes by false teaching and practice. They are coming to a conference whose theme is the uniqueness and sufficiency of Jesus Christ, the heart of the Gospel and the head of his Church (Col. 2:18). They are coming in a spirit of sacrifice (quite literally) and submission to the supremacy of Jesus Christ in their lives and the lives of their churches.
In the wake of the defeat of the proposed Anglican Covenant in the Church of England, Bishop Michael Nazir-Ali said, "The Jerusalem Declaration is [now] the only game in town." If you have never read the Jerusalem Declaration from the 2008 Global Anglican Future Conference (GAFCON) in Jerusalem, or if you need a refresher, I commend it to you. It describes the biblical, apostolic "faith once delivered" that is at the heart of the Anglican way of following Jesus. It provides a doctrinal basis around which Anglicans from all over the world can come together in unity to live our lives, individually and as a church, as Jesus would. It is a clarion call to fulfill Christ's Great Commission by proclaiming the transforming love of Jesus Christ to the whole world. More than that, it addresses the real crisis at the heart of the Anglican Communion between those who have departed from orthodox faith and practice within the official structures of the Anglican Communion and those who uphold orthodox faith and practice over and against the heterodox, but who have not yet been recognized by the "official structures" of the Anglican Communion. In Article 11 of the Jerusalem Declaration, confessing Anglicans recognize and desire full koinonia (the New Testament word translated variously as "communion" and "fellowship") with those who know and love God in Jesus Christ and uphold orthodox faith and practice. And in Article 12, confessing Anglicans reject koinonia with churches and leaders who have denied the orthodox faith in word and deed.
So here are the questions for this kairos moment in the life of the Anglican Communion: Could the Jerusalem Declaration be the basis for a "new covenant" that we can depend on to hold together the vast majority of the Anglican Communion (mostly in the Global South, but including the Anglican Church in North America and other Confessing Anglicans in the "Global North")? Could this gathering of leaders around the supremacy of Christ and The Jerusalem Declaration begin to address the questions about how we can faithfully order our Communion under such a new covenant? Can this gathering address the need for apostolic, conciliar and synodical structures that will truly maintain faith and order within the Anglican Communion?
It is an honor to represent you, through the American Anglican Council, on the leadership team that is organizing this historic gathering of Anglican leaders from across the Communion. I have every hope and reason to believe that these questions will be addressed. Please pray for these leaders that the LORD will grant them a Holy Spirit-inspired clarity "from the inside out" as we move forward.
Yours in Christ,
Phil+
|
Anglican Perspective: Limits to Dialogue
| March 28, 2012
This week, Canon Ashey discusses the recent attempt by activists for Lesbian Gay Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) causes to move their agenda to the continent of Africa and how this is affecting the Anglican Communion.
View this week's Anglican Perspective video here.
Back to top |
Encompass Newsletter
| The first edition of Encompass for 2012 is now available online.
In this edition you will find articles on the Archbishop of Canterbury's recently announced resignation, the aftermath of the AMiA's breakup, how LGBT activists are taking their "sexual dialogue" to Africa and more.
In Christ,
Robert Lundy,
AAC Communications Officer
Back to top |
| English church votes down pact to unite Anglicans | Source: Reuters UK
March 24, 2012
By Avril Ormsby
A proposed deal to hold the worldwide Anglican Communion together amid divisions over homosexuality and same-sex unions appeared to be in tatters on Saturday after the mother church, the Church of England, voted to reject it. Analysts said the Church's decision effectively derailed the adoption of the pact throughout the Communion, a loose family of 38 national and regional churches, and raised questions about whether the Christian alliance could stay united.
A majority of the Church of England's 44 districts or "dioceses" had decided against the landmark "Anglican Covenant" pact, campaigners against the agreement said.
"With today's results ... the proposed Anglican Covenant is now dead in the water in the Church of England. This also poses serious problems for the covenant in other provinces (member churches)," said Lesley Crawley, an English priest and moderator of the No Anglican Covenant Coalition.
The covenant was first proposed in 2004 in an attempt to deal with tensions between conservatives and liberals arising from the consecration of the openly gay bishop Gene Robinson by the Episcopal Church, the Anglican church in the United States.
The proposed deal required member churches to agree not to act in a way likely to upset Anglicans in other countries, and to settle disputes through consultation.
But the pact, which tried to bring liberal and conservative wings of the Communion together, ended up facing opposition from both sides....
The rest of the article may be found here.
Back to top |
Rwanda and Anglican Mission representatives meet, issue Communique
| Source: Anglican Mission website
March 29, 2012
 | |
Archbishop Wabukala
|
On Tuesday, March 13, 2012, Anglican Mission leaders met in Johannesburg, South Africa with Archbishop Eliud Wabukala, Archbishop of Kenya and Chairman of GAFCON, as wellas representatives of the Province of Rwanda. This gathering was a follow-up to a meeting Archbishop Wabukala hosted in Nairobi earlier this year to facilitate relational reconciliation between the Anglican Mission and Rwanda. Bishop Chuck Murphy, Archbishops Emmanuel Kolini, Moses Tay and Yong Ping Chung, Bishop John Miller and Canon Mike Murphy represented the Anglican Mission, and Archbishop Onesphore Rwaje and Bishop Laurent Mbanda attended on behalf of the House of Bishops of Rwanda. The group produced a Communiqué released today outlining an agreement to mutually bless both the AM and Rwanda, allowing each entity to move forward in their mission and ministry, fulfilling God's call on their lives....
Read the Communique here.
Back to top |
Georgia's 'Mother Church' fight going to Supreme Court
| Source: AP for the Atlanta Journal-Constitution
March 23, 2012
A Savannah congregation that split from the Episcopal Church in a dispute over homosexuality has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to hear its case over who owns the $3 million property of Georgia's "Mother Church."
The breakaway congregation has been fighting for years for ownership of Christ Church's downtown Savannah sanctuary, built in 1840. The church was established by
 | |
The historic Christ Church building
|
Georgia's colonial founders in 1733.
The congregation's leaders confirmed Friday they had appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court after exhausting their legal options at the state level.
The breakaway group held onto the downtown Savannah property for more than four years after it left the Episcopal Church in 2007 for affirming its first gay bishop. A long court battle followed, with the Georgia Supreme Court ruling Nov. 21 that the church property rightfully belongs to the Episcopal Church under its governing hierarchy and bylaws.
It's uncertain whether the nation's highest court will hear the case. Leaders of the breakaway group say it warrants attention because there have been more than 50 similar church cases litigated in other states....
The rest of the article may be found here.
Back to top |
Diocese of Albany: liberal church takes DEPO
| Source: Times Union
March 25, 2012
By James M. Odato
SCHENECTADY - The historic St. George's Church in Schenectady's historic Stockade neighborhood made some notable history on Sunday.
The parish had its first Mass under a new arrangement never before tried in the Episcopal Church in which a unit of a conservatively led diocese breaks away to be coached by a more liberal one. The goal is to open the church to more ideas, such as allowing gays to become pastors or feel more welcome or the words of the Scripture to be read for modern interpretation.
The congregates of the more than 250-year-old church, a modest stone building near the Mohawk River, did something no other group anywhere in the Episcopal world has done before, according to church leaders. The St. George worshipers creatively used a process called "Delegated Episcopal Pastoral Oversight," or DEPO, to roam from the theological orientation of the Episcopal Diocese of Albany, a bastion of conservative thinking, according to church elders.
DEPO was created in 2004 to allow conservative-leaning parishes surrounded by progressive or liberal congregations that might allow gay clergy or have more relaxed attitudes toward sexuality to partner with an outside bishop with similar views. Never, has DEPO been used the other way around. But St. George's started what appears to be the beginning of a movement on Sunday when the Syracuse diocese's bishop, Rev. Gladstone "Skip" Adams III, drove in from Central New York to help preside and begin guiding Pastor Paul F. Blanch, an energetic Brit who took over St. George's in 2009.
"It saddens me deeply that we have to have this situation," said Blanch. But, he said, he and the parishioners didn't wish to be bound by the views of religious conservatives. Both he and Bishop Adams appealed to Albany Diocese Bishop William Love for permission to use DEPO in a novel way, and Love gave his blessing, as long as St. George's remains in his jurisdiction. Two other parishes in the Albany diocese, St. Luke's in Saranac Lake, and St. John's in Essex are close to doing the same and St. Andrew's in Albany is also moving toward aligning with Bishop Adams, Adams said....
The rest of the article may be found here.
Back to top |
Bishop of Bolivia Called as Assistant Bishop for Diocese of Pittsburgh
| Source: Anglican Diocese of Pittsburgh
March 29, 2012
Bishop Frank Lyons has been called by Archbishop Robert Duncan, and with unanimous
 | |
Bishop Frank and Shawnee Lyons
|
support from the Standing Committee, to serve as Assistant Bishop in the Diocese of Pittsburgh. As Assistant Bishop, Lyons will assist with pastoral care and oversight to clergy and congregations in the Diocese of Pittsburgh during Archbishop Duncan's tenure as archbishop. Bishop Lyons will also exercise a special superintendence of diocesan congregations located beyond the Pittsburgh area.
"We are delighted to welcome Bishop Frank and his wife, Shawnee, to the Anglican Diocese of Pittsburgh. Bishop Frank is a highly capable leader who brings with him a wealth of experience. I am confident that he will provide the support our clergy and congregations need during this amazing period in our life together as a diocese," said Archbishop Duncan....
The rest of the article may be found here.
Back to top |
Europe battles hate crimes against Christians
| Source: MercatorNet
March 27, 2012
By Béatrice Stevenson
What was the most vilified religion in Scotland in 2010-2011? Not Islam - only 2.1 percent of religious hate crimes were directed against Muslims. Not Judaism - only 2.3 percent were directed against Jews. According to a report by the Scottish government, 95 percent of all religious hate crimes were directed against Christians.
"These statistics show the shameful reality of religious hate crime in Scotland," the Minister for Community Safety, Roseanna Cunningham, declared last year. "Like racism, this kind of behaviour simply shouldn't be happening in a modern Scotland but sadly, it seems there are still those who think hatred on the basis of religion is acceptable."
Christians are also the targets of most religious hate crimes in France. A report released last year showed that 84 percent of cases of religious vandalism had targeted Christian sites in 2010 - an increase of 96 percent in two years. Two hundred and fourteen cemeteries were vandalized, along with 272 chapels, 26 war memorials and 10 crosses.
Christian monuments are not the only targets. Earlier this month the hacker group Anonymous crashed the Vatican website, leaving a message: "Anonymous decided today to besiege your site in response to the doctrine, to the liturgies, to the absurd and anachronistic concepts that your for-profit organization spreads around the world."
The Observatory on Intolerance and Discrimination against Christians, an Austrian NGO, documents the growing problem of Christian persecution in Europe in a recently-released annual report....
The rest of the article may be found here.
Back to top |
Church growing in Iran despite repression
| Source: Christian Today
March 24, 2012
by Alex Murashko
Despite the Iranian government's ongoing crackdown on Christians living in the primarily Islamic country, the number of Muslims converting to Christianity is growing at an explosive rate in Iran, says Open Doors USA.
There is even talk of witnessing a Christian revival, especially among young people living in the country, say Open Doors ministry workers in the Middle East.
A house church movement within Iran is part of that revival and has triggered "many secret meetings". The growth in the number of Christians is reportedly happening in all regions, but mostly in larger cities.
Iran is ranked 5th on the Open Doors 2012 World Watch List of the top 50 worst persecutors of Christians.
"Open Doors workers think that the growth of Christianity has everything to do with Iranians getting to know the real face of Islam, the official religion of Iran, and the mistrust of the people toward the government and leaders following the fraudulent 2009 presidential election of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad," said a Middle East worker for Open Doors, whose name has been withheld for security reasons....
The rest of the article may be found here.
Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
|
