Desert's Child

The fountains splash and the daffodil trumpets sing to the heavens.

This is taken from Women of the Passion, A Journey to the Cross, which I wrote some years ago for a women's retreat. Today, we hear from Mary, mother of Jesus.

The LA Times story on the Deposition of John David Schofield is here.

The Episcopal News Service story is here.

Mad Priest, who makes me laugh out loud on a regular basis, offers this observation, entitled "One Last Fat Joke Afore Ye Go."

This is my favorite photo of Gayland, taken in Jerusalem on Palm Sunday in 1983. I love the look of joy on his face.

I had sent my heroine straight down a rabbit-hole ... without the least idea what was to happen afterwards. -- Lewis Carroll



**************************************************************************

Be prepared, as you read the information below, to feel as if you have gone through the looking glass into Canon32Land.

Canon32Land is a place where a bishop who is leading a schismatic movement expresses his concern for "the unity of the church."

It is a place where Episcopal parishes which already are part of The Episcopal Church must apply to "return" to The Episcopal Church and jump through multiple hoops to do so.

A place where "Christian charity" is used as an argument against going to court to protect your property from those who would take it illegally, where taking legal action to protect your property is "rupturing the bonds of affection."

A place where the diocesan leadership says it has "watched with sadness as issues and attitudes have caused deepening differences at all levels in the Anglican Communion" -- as if their issues and attitudes have had nothing to do with the divisions they have done their best to exacerbate for years.

It is a place where parishes loyal to the doctrine and discipline of The Episcopal Church have to appeal to a schismatic bishop in order to stay in TEC, a bishop who gets to be judge, jury, and source of final appeal.

It is a place where the schismatic bishop, who called members of his diocese who disagree with him "demons" in his diocesan convention address, will require 'a year-long non-disparagement clause, whereby the leaders of the Parish and the leaders of the Diocese agree not to disparage one another in public statements, press releases, website announcements and articles, other articles, and sermons' before "releasing" a parish "back" to TEC.

It is a place where a canon developed in the Diocese of Dallas to deal with parishes wanting to leave a diocese of The Episcopal Church has been twisted to apply to parishes who want to stay in The Episcopal Church while the diocesan leadership tries to take the diocese out of The Episcopal Church.

Yes, I know. It makes your head hurt, doesn't it?

Welcome to Canon32Land.

This was released today:

Subject: Ad Clerum: Guidelines released for diocesan Canon 32

To all clergy and convention delegates,


Today the Bishop and Standing Committee have released the Guidelines called for in the amendment to Canon 32, which was approved by our Diocesan Convention in November 2007. The amendment took effect 30 days after ratification by Convention.

The Guidelines set out a procedure to be followed if a parish wishes to initiate a separation from the diocese. They were prepared after consideration was given to specific concerns raised at deanery convocations and at the Convention. As much as possible, these concerns have been taken into consideration as the Guidelines were drafted.

The leadership of this diocese has watched with sadness as issues and attitudes have caused deepening differences at all levels in the Anglican Communion. Adding to this rupture of the bonds of affection are the growing numbers of lawsuits being filed by those who once were unified in faithful witness and ministry.


"Disagreement and division may be inevitable," commented Dean Ryan Reed, President of the Standing Committee, "but Christian charity must not be sacrificed in the process. The purpose of the Canon and the Guidelines is to provide for a charitable parting, if parting is necessary."

Attached to this announcement is a copy of Canon 32, "Controversy between Rector and Vestry or between a Parish and the Diocese," the Guidelines, and a pastoral Introduction from the Bishop. They are available on the diocesan Web site as well.

Suzanne Gill
Director of Communications


GUIDELINES FROM THE BISHOP AND STANDING COMMITTEE FOR THE POSSIBILITY OF SEPARATION UNDER CANON 32 OF THE DIOCESE OF FORT WORTH

Introduction

The Apostle Paul urges Christian believers to be “eager to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace,” and it is his words that we recall at the beginning of every service of baptism and confirmation: “There is one body and one Spirit… one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of us all.” (Ephesians 4: 3-6)

Striving to maintain the unity of the church is of particular concern to a Bishop in his ministry, for he is charged at his consecration “to guard the faith, unity and discipline of the Church.” Whenever the peace and unity of the Church are imperiled, it is the Bishop’s special vocation to address it as pastor and chief shepherd of the diocese.

In the words of the Archbishop of Canterbury, a “basic conviction of catholic theology” is that “the organ of union with the wider Church is the Bishop and the Diocese.” It is in the context of life together in the Diocese that tensions or estrangement from one another over faith and order first come to the surface. In such cases, all are obligated to work for reconciliation and healing. Separation comes as a last resort when such efforts have failed, and if it must come, it must be agreed upon in a respectful and non-litigious manner.

It is the responsibility of the Bishop to deal pastorally with any parish that feels estranged from the Diocese, as a focus and instrument of unity. If reconciliation is not possible, he should act in the best interest of both the Diocese and the parish in question, in so far as possible.

The following guidelines (as called for in Canon 32.3) are offered as a way forward in addressing the prospect of a parish seeking to separate from the Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth. They are guiding principles rather than hard-and-fast rules. It is expected that all parties will comply with them in a spirit of love and respect, dealing with one another as brothers and sisters in Christ in a time of conflict and estrangement.

The Rt. Rev. Jack Leo Iker
Bishop of Fort Worth
March 3, 2008

NOTE: We are deeply grateful to Bishop James M. Stanton and the Diocese of Dallas for allowing us to borrow from them in formulating both these guidelines and the canon concerning a controversy between a parish and the diocese (Canon 32)

GUIDELINES FOR CANON 32

1. Preliminaries

1.a At the time the Vestry and Rector of a Parish begin to explore formal separation from the Diocese, the Parish must be current in its financial support of the Diocese and in any loans outstanding to the Diocesan Revolving Fund.

1.b The Vestry must demonstrate that the Parish is current in its payments to the clergy pension fund and all other insurance and benefits.

1.c The Vestry and the Rector will signal their intent to explore formal separation from the Diocese by presenting the Bishop with a signed and dated document demonstrating intent to separate, dissociate, or disaffiliate (or similar language).

1.d The Vestry and the Rector will then devise and implement a plan demonstrating that they are approaching the matter of separation soberly, prayerfully, and pastorally, accounting for and respecting all the views held by members of the Parish.

1.e The clergy and any lay members of the parish holding elected or appointed office in the Diocese shall resign immediately therefrom.

1.f These guidelines envision a period of up to six months in which the Bishop, or his designees, will be involved in seeking a pastoral solution other than separation, if such is to be had.

2. Before any agreement can be finalized, a dossier containing the following elements will be gathered by the Vestry and Rector and conveyed to the Bishop and Standing Committee:

2.a A certified list of members qualified to vote at a parish meeting.

2.b A Statement of the Vestry on the issues within the Diocese of Fort Worth with which the Vestry and Parish are at odds.

2.c A Study of the extent of the disagreement of the leadership, including the Vestry, and the members of the Parish with respect to the issues identified above. This may be in the form of a congregational vote, a survey instrument, a petition, a poll, or some other means by which to register that disagreement.

2.d A Statement by each of the Clergy as to their desire to 1) remain in the Diocese, 2) resign from the ministry, or 3) be transferred to another Bishop of the Anglican Communion. This is a statement of desire only, and does not comprise a Letter of Resignation, or a Request for Letters Dimissory.

2.e Documentation as to the state of indebtedness of the parish, if any, and the amounts owed, to whom, for what purposes, and performance. Further, an accounting for all trust indentures, endowments and restricted gifts shall be made. The Vestry must show what, if any, of these make reference to the Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth, the Bishop of the Diocese (or his successors in Office), or the Episcopal Church, and the extent of the benefits intended for these entities.

2.f A Statement by the Vestry and Rector of the affiliation the Parish intends to establish with another ecclesial body (a Province or a Diocese of the Anglican Communion; or a body outside the Anglican Communion).

2.g Certification that the Parish has been duly incorporated under the laws of the State of Texas as a non-profit corporation and has received 501(c)(3) status.

3. Elements of an episcopal order:

It is expected that an agreement will be formulated to reflect the mutually agreed upon terms by which the Parish will separate. This shall form the basis for the issuance by the Bishop of an episcopal order, pursuant to Canon 32 of the Canons of the Diocese (see below). While the terms of any such agreement will vary with each Parish, it is generally expected that such terms will include, at a minimum, the following:

3.a Financial agreements

3.b A year-long non-disparagement clause, whereby the leaders of the Parish and the leaders of the Diocese agree not to disparage one another in public statements, press releases, website announcements and articles, other articles, and sermons.

3.c Indemnification of the Diocese by the Parish. The specific form of indemnification shall be agreed to in each case.

The written agreement made by the Vestry and Rector of the Parish, the Bishop, the Standing Committee, and the Board of Trustees of the Corporation of the Diocese shall be subject to ratification by 2/3 of the qualified members (see sec. 2.b) of the parish in a vote taken at a parish meeting (pursuant to Canon 26).

Legal transfer of property will occur when all terms of the agreement have been satisfied.

---CANON 32
CONTROVERSY BETWEEN RECTOR AND VESTRY
OR BETWEEN A PARISH AND THE DIOCESE

Section 32.1 When a Rector has been regularly settled in a Parish he shall not be dismissed without the consent of the Bishop of the Diocese.

Section 32.2 In case of a controversy between a Rector and Vestry, which cannot be settled by the parties themselves, the parties or either of them, may appeal to the Bishop. The duty of the Bishop shall be to seek to bring the parties to an amicable conclusion; and in such case, the agreement between them, signed by them and attested to by the Bishop, shall have the same force as an order made under Section 32.5 of this Canon.

Section 32.3 In the case of a controversy between a Parish and the Diocese, the Rector and a majority of the members of the Vestry may petition the Bishop, whose duty it shall be to seek to bring the parties to an amicable conclusion.

To that end, the Rector and majority of the Vestry shall provide a reasonable opportunity for the Bishop, a diocesan chancellor and a member of the Standing Committee to meet on parish property with the entire Vestry and such members of the parish as wish to be present.

Both verbal and written notice of the meeting must be provided to the members of the parish.

It will be the duty of the Bishop to determine the extent to which the members of the parish agree with the Rector and majority of the Vestry.

It shall also be the duty of the Bishop to make adequate provision in any resolution to protect the interest of the minority of the parish wishing to remain in union with the Diocese, and to protect the missionary interest of the Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth.

In the case where an agreement is reached, it shall be signed by the Rector and the Bishop and attested to by at least a two thirds majority of the members of the Vestry and at least a majority of the members of the Standing Committee.

This agreement shall have the same force and effect as an order made under Section 32.5 of this Canon. When reaching the conclusion amicably or pursuant to an order made under Section 32.5 of this Canon, consideration will be given to the provisions of Article 14 of the Constitution, Canon 18 and such guidelines as may be established by the Bishop and Standing Committee for the resolution of such disputes.

Section 32.4 If the matter shall not be amicably settled within a reasonable time, not to exceed six (6) months, the bishop shall convene the members of the Standing Committee and shall give notice to the parties to appear before him and them and present their facts and arguments, at such time and place as he may appoint; and he may adjourn and continue the hearing in the matter at his discretion.

Section 32.5 After all hearings as may be called for in Sections 32.2 through 32.4 above are concluded, the Bishop, after consultation with the Standing Committee, shall make such an order in regard to the matter as he may think to be just and for the best interest of the Church. It shall be the duty of the Diocese, the Rector and the Parish, and every member thereof, to submit to and abide by such order as the final and conclusive determination of all matters of difference between them.

UPDATE: The garden blessing at The Episcopal Church of Saint Thomas the Apostle will now start at 2:30 p.m. on Monday, April 28. The reception/Q&A will follow immediately in the parish hall. (The initial start time was posted as 6 p.m.)

For all you folks in the Fort Worth diocese who have wondered about our presiding bishop, Katharine Jefferts Schori, here's your chance to meet her, listen to her, talk with her.

She is visiting Dallas with the approval of Bp. James Stanton.



Presiding Bishop Jefferts Schori will be at St. Thomas the Apostle at 6525 Inwood Road in Central Dallas on Monday, April 28.

Mark your calendars now.

Here's the release from St. Thomas:

The Episcopal Church of Saint Thomas The Apostle announces that the Presiding Bishop of the U.S. Episcopal Church, the Most Rev. Katharine Jefferts Schori, will visit the Dallas parish on Monday April 28.

During her visit, the Presiding Bishop will participate in a blessing service for the new Saint Thomas Community Garden, tour the newly restored and rebuilt Saint Thomas church buildings and speak at a reception for church and community members. The garden blessing and reception will take place from 6 p.m. to 8 p.m.,[now 2:30 p.m] and members of other parishes and the general public are invited to attend.

“We are honored that the Presiding Bishop has accepted our invitation to visit our parish in Dallas, and we eagerly look forward to having her with us on April 28,” said the Rev. Stephen J. Waller, rector of Saint Thomas.

“Our Community Garden is growing food to fight hunger right here where we live,” Rev. Waller said. “It reflects the Millennium Development Goals of our national church to eradicate hunger wherever it occurs. Our community garden as well as our recently restored and rebuilt church facilities reflect our commitment and growth as a parish of thinking, tolerant Christians engaged in life with our God, our families and friends, and the broader community within the best traditions of the Episcopal Church.”

The Saint Thomas Community Garden is located on a formerly vacant lot adjacent to the church at the corner of Inwood Road and Mockingbird Lane in Dallas. Church members have created two large “pantry plots” on which they are growing vegetables that will be donated entirely to local food banks and organizations fighting hunger in Dallas. In addition, the garden has 16 private plots maintained by individuals who have agreed to give at least 10 percent of their harvest to local food banks.

Louie Crew is coming to Fort Worth.

How astonishing that simple sentence is.

On Saturday, March 1, Integrity Fort Worth will host Dr. Crew, whose topic will be “Exceedingly Glad in Times Like These,” at Celebration Community Church, 908 Pennsylvania Avenue, Fort Worth, TX.

Louie will speak at 3:30 PM after the Holy Eucharist at 2:00 PM, led by the Rt. Rev. Sam Hulsey, retired bishop of Northwest Texas. Registration will begin at 1:30 p.m. There will be a reception in the parish hall following Dr. Crew’s address.

There is no charge if you pre-register online here. If you register at the door, there is a small charge.

Louie Crew is one of my heroes, and he's probably a saint, although he would blush at such a statement. He is also one of my most treasured friends, and a constant source of pastoral care.

On days when I've felt as if I could not remain in The Episcopal Church as it has been incarnated in the Diocese of Fort Worth for one. more. day. all I've had to do is think of Louie and his gentle perseverance in the face of unbelievable meanness, rejection, and, yes, hatred, to realize I just needed to quit whining and get to work.

Louie is the embodiment of "loving your neighbor as yourself."

Give yourself a gift. Come hear him tomorrow.

If you think you know about homosexuality and Christianity, come to hear him tomorrow.

If you are fearful about including lesbians and gays in the life and ministry of the church, come hear him tomorrow.

If you think that you "hate the sin, but love the sinner", come hear him tomorrow.

If you agree with Bp. Jack Iker on the issue of homosexuality, come hear him tomorrow.

If you disagree with Bp. Jack Iker on the issue of homosexuality, come hear him tomorrow.

If you love someone who is lesbian or gay, come hear him tomorrow.

If the thought of being in the same room with someone lesbian or gay makes your skin crawl, come hear him tomorrow.

He will not hurt you. He will only love you as his sister or brother in Christ.

Come hear him.

I've been away from my computer a lot in the last few days because my husband had a triple bypass on Thursday. We discovered the need for this in a routine visit to his cardiologist, not by his having a heart attack. He is recovering well, thanks be to God, and we expect to have him home today or tomorrow.

So, while I was watching him sleep this afternoon, I decided to catch up on the goings-on in Anglican Land. Well, good grief! You look away for a minute and all sorts of things pop up.

The big news is a back room deal that's been hatched up by a bunch of bishops as a way to "save" the Anglican Communion. And yes, it's been a "secret," because transparency is apparently a concept that eludes the Archbishop of Canterbury and too many other bishops and primates.

This plan has been described as a combination of features of the primatial oversight plan that came out of the Primates meeting in the Dar es Salaam Communique, which included a "Pastoral Council," consisting of four Archbishops who are not members of the Episcopal Church; and the plan Presiding Bishop Jefferts Schori offered as an Episcopal Visitors Plan. Her plan also suggested a "Pastoral Council," made up of five foreign Primates, but the Presiding Bishop would have more authority than in the Dar es Salaam recommendation.

The first report by Jonathan Petre in the Telegraph in England called it a "secret plan." While Petre's article blew the plan's cover, he got a lot wrong -- a common occurrence with this journalist.

Then George Conger reported that the secret plan was "backed" by Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori.

While Conger got more things right than did Petre, I can find no statement from the presiding bishop that she is backing this plan --which was worked up by a lot of guys without consultation with her. After the guys were happy with it, they simply "presented" to her.

Then Kendall Harmon's site posted a letter from Bp. John Howe that appears to give the most accurate description of this "secret plan.'

Here is the full text of Bp. Howe's letter:

-----------------------------------------------------
Dear Brothers and Sisters,
It is not quite 11:30 PM here in Orlando. In London it is not quite 4:30 AM tomorrow. And Jonathan Petre of the London Telegraph has just released a story about yesterday's meeting between four American Bishops (Howe, Central Florida; MacPherson, Western Louisiana; Smith, North Dakota; and Stanton, Dallas) with the Presiding Bishop of The Episcopal Church.

Petre could not have been much more inaccurate! Here are his opening remarks:

"The Archbishop of Canterbury is backing secret plans to create a 'parallel' Church for American conservatives to avert fresh splits over homosexuality.... Dr Rowan Williams has held confidential talks with senior American bishops and theologians who oppose the pro-gay policies of their liberal leaders...."Dr Williams is desperate to minimize further damage in the run up to the once-a-decade Lambeth Conference this summer which could be boycotted by more than a fifth of the world's bishops.... "According to insiders, Dr Williams has given his blessing to the plans to create an enclave for up to 20 conservative American bishops that would insulate them from their liberal colleagues."

No, Dear Friends. Here is a summary of what we presented to the Presiding Bishop yesterday. We were not quite ready to release it, but in the light of this significant distortion, I am doing so tonight:

Communion Partners

In the context of the Episcopal Visitors concept announced by the Presiding Bishop at the House of Bishops meeting in New Orleans, a number of us have reflected a need for a larger gathering which we are calling Communion Partners. We believe such a gathering will afford us the opportunity for mutual support, accountability and fellowship; and present an important sign of our connectedness in and vision for the Anglican Communion as it moves through this time of stress and renewal.

Purpose:
To provide a visible link for those concerned to the Anglican Communion.
Many within our dioceses and in congregations in other dioceses seek to be assured of their connection to the Anglican Communion. Traditionally, this has been understood in terms of bishop-to-bishop relationships. Communion Partners fleshes out this connection in a significant and symbolic way.

To provide fellowship, support and a forum for mutual concerns between bishops.

The Bishops who have been designated Episcopal Visitors together with others who might well consider being included in this number share many concerns about the Anglican Communion and its future, and look to work together with Primates and Bishops from the Global South. In addition, we believe we all have need of mutual encouragement, prayer, and reassurance. The Communion Partners will be a forum for these kinds of relationships.

To provide a partnership to work toward the Anglican Covenant and according to Windsor principles.

The Bishops will work together according to the principles outlined in the Windsor Report and seek a comprehensive Anglican Covenant at the Lambeth Conference and beyond.

Scope:
The Communion Partners will be informally gathered – there will be no “charter” or formal structure

Are committed to non-boundary-crossing: the relationships will be governed by mutual respect and proceed by invitation and cooperation

Will work with mutual cooperation within and beyond the partnership

Participants:
The Episcopal Visitors who desire to participate (EVs named at House of Bishops New Orleans)
Those Bishops who are willing to serve as EVs
Initially, five Primates of the Global South: West Indies, Tanzania, Indian Ocean, Burundi, Middle East

Transparency:
Communication of activities with both the Presiding Bishop and Archbishop of Canterbury
Respect for the canonical realities, integrities and structures of the Episcopal Church and other Churches

Our purpose in meeting with Bishop Schori yesterday was to apprize [sic] her of this plan, seek her counsel, and assure her that we remain committed to working within the Constitution and Canons of The Episcopal Church, and that the Primates involved in this discussion are NOT involved in "border crossing," nor would we be. We will visit no congregation without the Diocesan Bishop's invitation and permission. We do believe this is a step forward, albeit a small one.

I hope this is helpful, and I thank you for your prayers regarding this important meeting.

Warmest regards in our Lord,
The Right Rev. John W. Howe
Episcopal Bishop of Central Florida
1017 East Robinson Street
Orlando, Florida 32801

-----------------------------------------------------------
Good try, boys, but this isn't going to work. At least not as far as Bp. Jack Iker is concerned.

For one thing, it still has girl cooties all over it, because the Presiding Bishop would still be involved -- even though you have marginalized her about as much as you possibly could.

Secondly, Bp. Iker was not consulted on this, according to Conger. I'd say that's a deal breaker right there, even if the girl cootie factor wasn't there. Bp. Iker does NOT like being left out of "deals" that involve him. Hey, can you blame him?

Thirdly, the commitment to no border crossing pretty much leaves the Diocese of Fort Worth out, since our leadership is already well on its way to the Southern Cone, moving happily hand-in-hand with one of the chief border crossers, Greg Venables, presiding bishop of the Southern Cone. Venables has been busily building up the population of his teensy province by poaching in both Canada and the US.

And then there's the involvement of Drexel Gomez, Primate of the West Indies. The enthusiasm in this plan for the development of an Anglican Covenant clearly is driven by Gomez, since he's the chair of the committee to develop such a Covenant.

Why the Archbishop of Canterbury did not remove Gomez as chair of this committee after he participated in the consecrations in Kenya of bishops whose task is to border cross to poach in the United States is one of the many mysteries surrounding the thinking of Rowan Williams.

But didn't it occur to the authors of a plan that commits to no border crossing that including someone who has supported border crossers among its members might not be a good idea?

This plan should be DOA.

Bishop Iker has announced his intention to attend GAFCON, the Global Anglican Future Conference, here.

Some of you will remember that GAFCON is the conference that a few disgruntled primates announced they were going to have in Jerusalem in lieu of going to Lambeth. These primates include Greg Venables, the Presiding Bishop of The Anglican Province of the Southern Cone, as well as Peter Akinola, Primate of the Anglican Church in Nigeria. They said it would be a meeting to chart the course of a new "Global Anglicanism," along with a pilgrimage.

The primates announced the conference, it turned out, before they had consulted with Bishop Suheil Dawani of Jerusalem. Bishop Dawani was not happy about them importing their homophobic agenda into his already challenging diocese and asked them to move it elsewhere.

After trying to persuade Bp. Dawani to change his mind, and after portraying him as a petulant prelate, the organizers finally did move the conference. To Jordan. Which, it turns out, is part of the Diocese of Jerusalem.

George Conger reported "The Gafcon organizing committee, which is arranging an alternative to the Anglican Lambeth Conference, has announced that the dates and venue of the Jerusalem conference have been changed.

"Following consultations with the Bishop in Jerusalem, the Rt Rev Suheil Dawani, the conference will now be broken into two parts: a consultation for church leaders in Jordan from June 18-22 and a pilgrimage to Jerusalem from June 22-29."

As Mark Harris remarked on his blog, "Then again, perhaps the Bishop of Jerusalem gave in. Who knows? Still, if I said, "not in my house, please" I would somehow assume it was understood that I included the back porch."

Picky, picky.

Anyway, Bp. Iker is going. The press release on the diocesan website said, "Described as 'a full week of planning and pilgrimage,' the event is being organized by the leading orthodox Primates of the Anglican Communion, and participation in the conference is by invitation only.

"'I want to demonstrate my solidarity with the Bishops of the Global South,' Bishop Iker said, 'and to stand with them as we seek a positive way forward for the mission of the Anglican Communion during this time of dissension. I expect it to be a time of spiritual renewal and refreshment.' The conference program will focus on worship, prayer, discussion, and Bible study, shaped by the context of the Holy Land."

There is a key phrase in that statement -- "as we seek a positive way forward for the mission of the Anglican Communion during this time of dissension."

Got that? Attending a conference in a diocese whose bishop has asked the organizers several times not to hold the conference there, attending a conference whose purpose is to be an alternative Lambeth meeting designed to embarass the Archbishop of Canterbury, attending a conference to begin establishing a new Anglican Communion is "seeking a positive way forward."

When the Standing Committee of the Diocese of Fort Worth issued its first statement on aligning the diocese with Southern Cone, it said that such an alliance would "allow the Diocese to concentrate on the call of Jesus Christ to preach the Gospel and make new disciples, while at the same time assuring our continued place in the mainstream of Anglicanism, an assurance The Episcopal Church is unable to give."

Another key phrase here -- "A continued place in the mainstream of Anglicanism."

Hold that thought while you return with me to 2005, and an interview that Archbishop Bernard Malango, Primate of Central Africa, gave to David Virtue. Fr Jake has also pointed out this interview on his blog, as has Mark Harris.

----------------------------------
...If there is no resolution and solution of this situation, the Global South will go it alone and we will form a church - a true Anglican Church - and those in the West who believe in the authority of the Scriptures only would be admitted...

...We shall meet as CAPA Primates in October and one of the questions will be where a new Anglican Communion will be set up. We shall approach that question very carefully. The choice right now is Alexandria. We did not want it to be in Israel....too political, nor any other Middle East nation, nor Africa, for obvious reasons, nor Europe or Southeast Asia. We think Alexandria, Egypt is best as we can trace our historical roots from there. We can then start from an historical basis...

...It will all be resolved before the next Lambeth Conference. It will all be done within the next three years because we are fed up with talking...

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

OK. A couple of more key phrases here -- "The Global South will go it alone and we will form a church, a true Anglican Church. . .One of the quesions will be where a new Anglican Communion will be set up. . . It will be resolved before the next Lambeth Conference."

So it looks as if they are right on schedule in their plan to set up a "new" Anglican Communion.

This would be an Anglican Communion without the Archbishop of Canterbury, and with only six [so far] primates in attendance -- including the Man Who Would Be Primate of The Diocese of Fort Worth, Greg Venables.

By way of contrast, six hundred bishops [so far] are planning to attend Lambeth.

Which sounds to you like the "mainstream of the Anglican Communion"?

But hold on. Bp. Iker still might go Lambeth.

According to the release on the diocesan web site, he "'remains in consultation' with several other bishops regarding attendance at the upcoming Lambeth Conference of Bishops, which is to be held at the University of Kent in Canterbury from July 16 to August 3. He also will be seeking the advice of his own clergy about participating in this gathering of Anglican bishops from around the world that meets once every ten years. Bishop Iker was among those in attendance at the last Lambeth Conference, which was held in 1998."

It's hard to resist that tea party with the Queen. So Bp. Iker may go to BOTH meetings.

But interestingly enough, right now what Bp. Iker does is less important than what Greg Venables does.

Why? Well, if you are a member of the Diocese of Fort Worth, your leadership has promised you that if you follow them to the Southern Cone, you will still be an Anglican, because the Southern Cone is part of the Anglican Communion.

But given Venables' refusal to attend Lambeth, and his role in planning GAFCON, a conference whose stated goal is to start the establishment of a "new" Anglican Communion, I wouldn't be so sure about that.

If the Southern Cone leaves the Anglican Communion -- whose membership is defined as "being in communion with the Archbishop of Canterbury" -- for a 'new" communion based in Alexandria with no ties to Canterbury at all, I don't see how they can claim to still be Anglicans. And if they are not Anglicans, where does that leave all the folks who are willing to follow Bp. Iker to the Southern Cone?

So, let's review here.

Bp. Iker and the Standing Committee and many of the clergy here are telling us repeatedly that the Diocese of Fort Worth has to leave The Episcopal Church and align with the Southern Cone to make sure we remain in full communion with the See of Canterbury, which will let us retain our Anglican identity after TEC is kicked out of the Anglican Communion, which they are SURE is going to happen.

The Presiding Bishop of The Episcopal Church has been invited to Lambeth and plans to attend. The Presiding Bishop of the Southern Cone has announced he's NOT going to Lambeth.

Instead, the Presiding Bishop of the Southern Cone is an organizer of a meeting whose stated purpose is to established a plan to leave the Anglican Communion and to start a new Anglican Communion that does not include the Archbishop of Canterbury.

So when they promise you that you will "still be Anglican," be wary. Be very wary.

UPDATE:
MY FAMILY AND I would like to thank all of you for your prayers and the many expressions of concern and support about our daughter Chrissy. I am glad to tell you that she is making slow, but steady progress and that after four days in ICU, she was moved last night to a regular room. She now begins a regimen of medications for her heart and blood pressure problems. Your ongoing prayers will mean a great deal to all of us.
From Bp. Iker
2/20/08
--------------------------------------
I ask your prayers for Christine Iker, a young woman in her 30s who has suffered her second heart attack. I also ask your prayers for her parents, Bishop Jack Iker and his wife, Donna.

Please pray for a complete recovery for Christine, and for courage, peace, and grace for her parents and her children.

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

AD CLERUM
FROM THE BISHOP

Chrissy, our oldest daughter (37), suffered a very serious heart attack on Friday afternoon, caused by cocaine and heroin. Though it appears that she will survive, at least at this point, the long term prognosis is not good. She has severely damaged her heart again, having already had a very similar heart attack in '97. She has only 25% of her heart functioning. Your prayers are most appreciated.
+JLI

More than one person has said to me, “Well, I’m on our vestry, but I’m afraid to challenge the priest when he says he’s going to take the parish to the Southern Cone.”

Or, “One of my friends is on the vestry of her parish, and she’s going to stay in TEC, but she’s certainly not going to say so in the meetings and get everyone mad at her.”

Or, “Well, if I speak up in vestry meetings in defense of TEC, I’m attacked for being pro-gay and accused of heresy. I don’t want to face that.”

Folks, you need to get a grip.

Serving on the vestry of your church isn’t like being elected to an elite club where everyone politely defers to one another and blindly follows the leader.

If you are a member of the vestry in a parish in the Diocese of Fort Worth, you need to be aware of your legal responsibilities, especially now as our bishop and Standing Committee are urging the diocese to take unlawful actions. Otherwise, you could find yourself facing serious legal and canonical consequences.

The term vestry comes to us from Great Britain. It referred to “the room next to the nave of the church where the sacred vessels and vestments were kept.” Those who conducted the parish business also used this room for meetings, and so that body became known as the vestry.

The vestry’s executive committee, as it were, it made up of the two wardens and the rector. The principle behind the structure of the vestry is the same as that of The Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion – ordered and distributed authority.

The duties of a vestry are outlined in the canons of The Episcopal Church [when the phrase “the Church” is used, it refers to The Episcopal Church]:
- Hold responsibility with the rector in promoting the spiritual welfare of the parish.
- Aid the Rector in the institution, conduct, and development of the program of the Church both within and without the Parish.
- Act as agent and legal representative in all matters concerning property: maintain the buildings and furnishings, maintain other property (rectory, parking lot, grounds, etc.), provide adequate insurance.
- Be responsible for the finances of the parish, raising money, prompt payment of salaries and bills, prudent care of trust funds, endowments and bequests, sale and transfer of securities and other assets, maintain records, annual report, budget (approve expenditures and recommend and approve salaries)
- Recruit, encourage, train, and guide candidates for Holy Orders
- Represent the parish in its relations with the Rector
- Serve as”Council of Advice" for the Rector when requested
- Elect a Rector if there is a vacancy

An attorney who consulted with a nearby diocese pointed out that all “Communicants of the Church who are elected as members of Vestries, Standing Committees or are other officers in this Diocese, have duties under both Canon law (National Canons, Title I, Canon 17, Section 8) and under our civil laws-- these are called “fiduciary duties.” Thus, all who occupy these offices of trust must exercise the duty of utmost good faith and loyalty to the Church--and ‘the Church’ means the national Episcopal Church, not just the diocese or the parish.

“Members of a parish, vestry members and diocesan officers cannot lawfully perform those duties when they are acting in their own personal interests or when they are acting against the best interests of a parish, a diocese or the National Church. A vestry has the duties of a Board of Directors of a corporation, and the members of the vestry are liable for violating their duties to the parish, which is a part of the national Church.

“It is also clear that bishops and priests are liable if they act contrary to the Constitution or Canons of the national Church and of the Diocese. Title IV of the National Canons provides for the trial of bishops and priests who violate the National Canons or their oaths as priests of the Church.

“No diocese has any right to act contrary to the national Church or its Constitution and Canons. A diocese is a creature of the national Church; it cannot deal with or negotiate with other bodies, such as the Anglican Communion; that is solely the duty, and right, of the national Church.”

As the attorney states: “A diocese is not a stand alone entity, but rather a constituent part of the Episcopal Church in the United States.”

The Diocese of Fort Worth was created by the national Church. It has a duty to adhere to the faith, worship, discipline and laws of the national Church.

Similarly, parishes and missions are parts of the national Church and must abide by the Constitution and Canons of the National Church and the Constitution and Canons of the Diocese.

When the diocese and parishes act as if they are independent entities that can do as they please, they are in danger of committing unlawful acts, which includes attempting to wrongfully take Church property, or passing resolutions which purport to authorize either the diocese or a parish to violate the law and property rights of the national Church.

Certainly Bp. Iker and those who wish to accompany him have the right to leave The Episcopal Church and to associate with whatever group they wish.

They do not have the right or power to take a diocese with them.

And, as the attorney quoted above concluded, vestry members who go along with the violation of their fiduciary duties are subject to both civil and criminal sanctions, just as the trust department of a bank is subject to both if and when it violates the trust agreement. The trust department cannot, unilaterally, decide that it will take the client's money and put it into a different trust benefiting someone different from the client.

At last we are getting some information about the constitution and canons of the Southern Cone.
--------------------------------------







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

Two of my dearest friends, Claire Garrett and Mariana Thomas Gregg, are gone.

Claire died last year, Mariana died last week.

In the photo, Claire is on the left, Mariana on the right -- this is a rare photo of Mariana. She hated having us take her picture.

I had been mourning them for a long time before they died, as both of them had begun to recede from us into the terrible fog of Alzheimer’s several years ago.

Both Mariana and Claire were older than I am, but the age difference was part of why I treasured them. Their wisdom, common sense, and sheer grace were ongoing gifts to me. [Somewhere, Mariana is surely giving a very ladylike snort at the very idea of the word “grace” being connected to her – she was a very no-nonsense pragmatic woman who did not see herself that way.]

Mariana was an architect, among the first women to practice that art in Fort Worth. She designed lovely homes with a Japanese influence, full of clean lines and simple elegant beauty. Her son Brian is equally talented. She supported herself and her three sons quite nicely with her work.

She taught me so much. She taught me how to “see” buildings. She taught me more about art than any book or course simply by letting me watch and listen to her reactions at various museum and gallery openings. She was smart and blunt and funny and deeply, essentially kind.

She had the best “eye” for quality I’ve ever encountered. She would walk into a store, a market, an art gallery, and instinctively head straight for the best thing in the building. She knew more about color than most artists.

Shopping with her was always educational. I’d pick up something I was considering purchasing, and look over at her. If the eyebrow went up, I just put it back. Later she might or might not tell me why. Usually she left it to me to figure out.

She taught me a lot about gardening, since she brought that same excellent “eye” to landscaping. She taught me how to fearlessly prune a tree to help it be its best, and she taught me how to see the bones of a garden even amid overgrown brambles and shrubs. She taught me to see beyond the immediate satisfaction of flowers. She taught me to appreciate the thousands of different shades of green that make up a garden and how to value the different textures that various plants add, even if they never ever actually bloom.

She taught me that a few fine clothes beat a lot of merely OK clothes. She taught me that if your feet hurt, it doesn’t matter how cute your shoes are. She was an earthbound realist, and suspending disbelief was not easy for her. I can’t count the numbers of movies we went to where Mariana’s snorts of disbelief had me giggling all through some fantasy of a movie.

Her extremely dry wit caught me off guard all the time, and it was only when I learned to look for the mischievous twinkle in her eye that I began to keep up with her.

Claire and Mariana and Diane Orr and I spent a lot of time talking over meals of excellent food and drink. Claire, Mariana and Diane are all better cooks than I am, so many of these meals were at Claire’s house. Claire would prepare a brisket or a pork loin, and the rest of us would bring salads or vegetable or wine.

These meals taught me what agape means. They were the embodiment of “self-giving loyal concern that freely accepts another and seeks her good.”

"Claire."

Just saying the name makes me feel cosseted and safe.

Claire was an astonishingly beautiful red-haired woman with the best legs in town. She was elegant and classy and all of us wanted to look like her. My daughter, who also has red hair, has always said she wants to look like Claire when she’s a grandmother.

Claire had the gift of hospitality. She made everyone feel welcomed in her home. I’ve lost count of the number of people I met in Claire’s kitchen. We always ended up in Claire’s kitchen, no matter how many times she tried to entice us out into the rest of the house.

After a deck was built onto the back of her house, we’d gather out there, but only if Claire was out there. If she was in the kitchen working, we would all migrate back inside. Being near Claire was wonderful. She made us all feel loved and valued and treasured and safe.

Claire would sit at the head of the long dining room table that Mariana and I had helped her pick out, and preside over conversations that ranged from politics to religion to ethics to raising kids to the strangeness of automobiles to just about any other subject one can think of.

We celebrated the births and accomplishments of children and grandchildren, mourned the death of parents, rejoiced over promotions, comforted the sad, argued with the stubborn, listened to the passionate, and fed our bodies and souls on great food amid love and companionship.

Claire taught me how to be a real hostess, how to be a welcoming presence in the world. She taught me that plates don’t have to match for a dinner party to be a success. She taught me that good food is nice, but good friends matter more.

She taught me that if you wait until your house is perfect to entertain, you’ll never entertain. She told me that if friends are coming over to check on your housekeeping, they aren’t friends.

Claire was the supreme appreciator. I don’t care if you brought her a bouquet of wilted dandelions, she would make you feel you had showered her with rare roses. She thought all of us were the most brilliant, talented, gorgeous people in the world and told us so regularly.

Claire could talk with anyone. Someone once said Claire had raised small talk to an art, but the truth is, there WAS no small talk to Claire. She was genuinely interested in everyone, and they sensed that within seconds of meeting her. People would positively glow under Claire’s regard. She thought they were charming and interesting, and around her, by gosh, they were.

These women have left enormous legacies, even if most of the world might never realize it. Claire’s sons and daughters and grandchildren are all beautiful successful people, endowed with her graces. Mariana’s buildings remain gorgeous, of course, and her sons are handsome talented men, carving out their paths in the world with supreme individuality.

I will never smell a scented geranium without thinking of Claire. I will never prune a tree without thinking of Mariana.

I will miss them for the rest of my life.

Back in January 14, 2004, Simon Sarmiento posted a Washington Post article on the Thinking Anglicans web site here.

The story was about a document that has become known as The Chapman Letter, because it was written by Geoff Chapman, rector of St. Stephens Church in Sewickley, Pa., in The Diocese of Pittsburgh.

It lays out a plan to undermine The Episcopal Church. Read it and see if any of the tactics strike you as familiar.
--------------------------------

Wednesday, 14 January 2004
Anti-ECUSA plot revealed
Today’s Washington Post carried this story:

Plan to Supplant Episcopal Church USA Is Revealed

The full text of the document mentioned in the story can be found below.

December 28th, 2003
Dear Friends,
I am Geoff Chapman, Rector of St Stephens Church in Sewickley, Pa. (Diocese of Pittsburgh). I am responding to you on behalf of the American Anglican Council and their Bishops’ Committee on Adequate Episcopal Oversight (AEO). Thanks for contacting us; we very much want to network with you in these difficult times and be of real help to you.

The AAC Strategy Committee has been working for months on AEO. In consultation with a wide circle of friends - inside this country and beyond - we have clarified our strategy and are now moving to implement it. I am serving as their response person for AEO, and I want to brief you on our progress. This document will get you up to speed on where we are going. Please keep this document confidential, sharing it in hard copy (printed format) only with people you fully trust, and do not pass it on electronically to anyone under any circumstances.

1) Our ultimate goal is a realignment of Anglicanism on North American soil committed to biblical faith and values, and driven by Gospel mission. We believe in the end this should be a “replacement” jurisdiction with confessional standards, maintaining the historic faith of our Communion, closely aligned with the majority of world Anglicanism, emerging from the disastrous actions of General Convention (2003). We believe this goal is now pressed upon us by the Holy Spirit as a result of the rejection of the historic Christian faith and the rejection of biblical and Communion authority by the leadership of ECUSA. We will lead our congregations and partners in making the adjustment to adopt this strategy. We seek to retain ownership of our property as we move into this realignment.

2) As an intermediate step, we will respond to the urgent pastoral need in our country by offering Adequate Episcopal Oversight to parishes or remnants of parishes who share our deeply held convictions, proceeding under the guidance of our Bishops and the Primates. Bp Griswold’s offer of “Extended Episcopal Care” is unacceptable, fundamentally flawed and disingenuous, and does not meet the needs of our parishes or the intentions of the Primates. Our AEO will maintain confidentiality in the application process, and seek transfer of Parish oversight across geographic diocesan boundaries to an orthodox bishop, the right of pastoral succession, liberty of conscience In financial stewardship (the right to “redirect” funds), and negotiated property settlements affirming the retention of ownership in the local congregation.

The implementation of Adequate Episcopal Oversight will normally follow a two-step, “Stage 1 Then Stage 2” process.

Stage 1 will feature “spiritual realignment” while remaining within the letter of current canons. Parishes would publicly announce that their relationship with their diocesan Bishop is “severely damaged” because of the events of the summer, and that they are now looking to one of the Primates or an AAC orthodox Bishop for their “primary pastoral leadership”. Announcements will need to be carefully phrased to avoid canonical violations.

During the months of Stage 1, we will begin to reform our relationships to build the Network of Anglican Communion Dioceses and Parishes. We will move to initiate support structures for fellowship and strategy, We will act courageously and faithfully to support “at risk” parishes. We will creatively redirect finances. We will refocus on Gospel initiatives. We will innovatively move around, beyond or within the canons to “act like the church God is making us”. Stage 1 will enable congregations/clusters to keep clear use of their buildings for the foreseeable future, and would give critical time to strengthen our leadership circles for what promises to be a turbulent spiritual season.

Stage 2 will launch at some yet to be determined moment, probably in 2004. During this phase, we will seek, under the guidance of the Primates, negotiated settlements in matters of property, jurisdiction, pastoral succession and communion, If adequate settlements are not within reach, a faithful disobedience of canon law on a widespread basis may be necessary.

Some congregations have already proceeded to “Stage 2” because of local circumstances. While we cannot offer AEO under an AAC diocesan Bishop at this time, we do have non-geographical oversight available from “offshore” Bishops, and retired Bishops. We may also be able to offer oversight from special designated priests acting on behalf of our AAC Diocesan Bishops.

3) Our local strategy for developing AEO will have to keep our goal and current hostile circumstances in mind. We call it a “cluster strategy”, and it will closely sync with the establishment and spread of the Network of Anglican Communion Dioceses and Parishes. We are developing clusters of churches (3-30 churches per cluster) in 15-30 varying dioceses. These churches would join the Network and apply for AEO whenever possible as diocesan clusters. When they are prepared, we will sequence public announcements of their intentions to realign in successive weeks to build impact. These churches will need Clergy and Vestries who are unified, well networked, and ready for a season of conflict if necessary.

Smaller, isolated congregations that cannot connect with a supporting cluster will be welcome to apply, but encouraged to make a public announcement later in 2004. They will sail in the wake of the leadership of stronger clusters.

Parishes/clusters that go through this process in a “Stage 2” mode and Bishops who receive such parishes/clusters will be at risk of litigation and presentment, and should be prepared for such.
An AAC Bishop could be available to go with any parish/cluster to meet with the diocesan Bp, as needed. We think the presence of an AAC Bishop with a stated partnership with the Primates could change the dynamics of such a meeting.

This “Stage 1, Stage 2, Cluster Strategy” has several advantages: It will…

(1) build “rising orthodox network” DNA among the networked churches. Churches in the clusters would gain formative experiences of working together, depending upon each other, praying together, linking with the Global South, and if need be, suffering together. This would be invaluable for the months and years ahead.

(2) give us our best shot at a success. Any isolated parish that moves alone into the revisionist line of fire at this point is going to be in peril. Congregations moving in clusters have the advantage of leveraging their combined strength.

(3) generate significant public attention both within this country and among our world-wide partners.

(4) build “position” for any settlement talks in the future.

4) We are building a network of “Cluster Moderators” who will serve emerging clusters as they gather. These leaders should have a servant’s heart and a broad base of support in their own parishes that will enable them to come alongside conflicted or imperiled congregations. They must be able to bridge the lines of our coalition with genuine respect for the differences within the orthodox community. We will identify these key leaders as soon as possible.

5) We would cover everything in intentional, dependent Christ-centered prayer, seeking the Holy Spirit’s leading and provision at every point, Prayer support cells will be developed around the country and mobilized at critical moments.

Here are some “Frequently Asked Questions” :
1) What does it take to apply for AEO (Adequate Episcopal Oversight)?
Normally we would ask for the signature of the Rector and a supporting vote of the Vestry. When you have reached this point of decision, send the application to the AAC office. There is no need to inform your Bishop yet of the application. We will inform him with you in due time. You can find the application and guidelines here:http://www.americananglican.org/News/News.cfm?ID=827&c=21


2) Does AEO mean that the orthodox overseeing Bishop would have control of the call, licensing, and canonical residence of the clergy?
We do not know the answers to that, but our Bishops will be exploring these issues as we move forward. The AAC bishops are not prepared to sign off on an arrangement that will leave a congregation in continuing high risk, and that means that issues of spiritual authority, pastoral succession and episcopal oversight must be solved, That Is the fundamental difference between Adequate Episcopal “Oversight” envisioned by Canterbury and the Primates and the Episcopal “Care” offered by Griswold. However, there are many details yet to be ironed out.


3) What legal liabilities would you face if you wanted to leave your current diocese?
Recent litigation indicates that the local diocesan authorities hold almost all the cards in property disputes and clergy placement if they want to play “hardball”.

But we think that the political realities are such that American revisionist bishops will be reticent to play “hardball” for a while. They have just handed the gay lobby a stunning victory, but are being forced to pay a fearsome price for it. The opposition at home is far greater than they anticipated and the opposition overseas is serious and inflamed. ECUSA will certainly lose members and funds at a high rate over the next months, accelerating their decline. In one short summer they have managed to radicalize all the orthodox in our communion and take away the “middle ground” where so many of our members have hidden! This has put many (perhaps even most) parishes in conflict and made the survival of many smaller parishes a large and urgent question. No one is very happy about this inside ECUSA, and the American public is hardly cheering the events in New Hampshire.

ECUSA leaders know well how conservatives could quickly become the “victims” in the public mind. They also know that all of our AEO work will eventually find its way across the desk of the Archbishop of Canterbury (ABC). All of this together will create pressure for them to cooperate with the ABC/Primate’s call for AEO. So we suspect that there will be a window of time before they return to “hardball” tactics.

The AAC has a new “Legal Resources” link on their home page, and if you or your new Vestry need help in this area, we would suggest contacting them. http://www.americananglican.org/Issues/IssuesList.cfm?c=47


4) Can we redirect our funds?
This is happening on a widespread basis. There are several strategies to consider. Some parishes have used “donor intent” to trump diocesan canon. The argument goes something like this… “In these conflicted times we will offer our congregation pledge forms with options to indicate their preferred use of their funds. The options go… “Would you like to have a canonical portion of your gift sent (1) to the Diocese? (2) To the National Church? Or (3) To the Vestry for their judgment on whether to pass on funds to the Diocese or National Church? All redirected funds will go to Anglican missions who are committed to biblical faith, values and Gospel ministry?

The Vestry then informs the Diocese that they feel it important to allow their members to follow their conscience. Arguing for “freedom of conscience” and the honoring of “donor intent” is very difficult for liberals to oppose, regardless of the strength of your state law. And it should give your parish some breathing room as you seek to move through this difficult season together.
For a biblical/theological understanding of redirecting funds, look at John Guernsey’s talk from the Dallas Conference. You can find it here:

http://americananglican.org/News/News.cfm?ID=784&c=21


5) What is important over the next months?
Here are some concrete suggestions for your consideration:

a. Join the Network of Anglican Communion Dioceses and Parishes. Here’s some basic information:http://www.americananglican.org/News/News.cfm?ID=920&c=21
Look to the AAC website for updates.

b. Form diocesan “clusters” with sympathetic churches. This is essential. An AAC chapter can be the seedbed for a cluster that is seeking realignment. Circle up, pick a moderator, and contact us at AAC headquarters.

c. Be careful of your language. Don’t declare yourself “out of communion” with your diocesan Bishop as such statements have been used as evidence for canonical action against clergy (“abandonment of communion” in Philadelphia). To say that your communion is “impaired” or “damaged” is a wiser response for the moment. Let the excommunications come from the Primates.

d. Prioritize your issues and pursue them in due order. Sort out the challenges you face and go after the most important first, while saving the least important till last. The issues you face could include securing new leadership, consolidating and educating your Vestry, building a network of support within your Diocese, stabilizing your, congregation, etc. Take first things first. Operate in God’s time. Don’t be stampeded to early and untimely actions. The Primates will move over the next months to build a growing and determined solution to the crisis. It will be good to follow their lead and that of the AAC Bishops.

e. Be measured, deliberate and courageous in your responses, “Wise as serpents and gentle as doves was Jesus’ phrase for it! This is a moment for courageous and clear leadership. Watch out for the spirit of anger or self-righteousness! It will kill fractured parishes.

f. Join and build the network of churches committed to biblical values and faith. There will be safety in numbers. See if there are other parishes in your diocese who could also apply for AEO. Work in partnership with us in the AAC. Either we hang together or we hang separately! And don’t forget (when it seems like you are all alone) that Christ himself has promised to walk with us through these times!

g. Familiarize yourself with the strategy affirmed in Dallas in October and talk and pray about how you can apply it locally. It can be found here:
http://www.americananglican.org/petitions/Petition.cfm?petitionID=8

h. Keeping close to Christ is essential. Read your Bible. Pray lots. Be aware of Satan’s opposition and resist him. Worship regularly. Stay in good fellowship with close Christian friends. Watch out for your own emotions, especially anger and frustration, and remember that the Holy Spirit’s leading is not the same as your emotions! We will be of no use to the Lord Jesus in these struggles if we are not fully His!

i. Remember confidentiality! Much is at stake over these next months. The careers of godly men and women, the possibility of congregational survival, the Anglican witness to Christ in our culture and generation, etc. We ask you not to spread these emails over the internet, and to speak of them only to people you trust. In the end, everything will be spoken plainly, but the ability to get organize and take counsel together effectively depends upon our readiness to keep confidentiality.

Here are some Internet resources that might be of value in keeping you informed…

[a long list of web sites follows]

We will keep all details of our contact with parishes in confidence. Please do not hesitate to keep in touch with me or with the AAC office if we can be of further help. God bless you, as you courageously serve Christ and his gospel.

Geoffrey W. Chapman
Rector, St Stephens Sewickley, Pa
[Gives contact information]