The Episcopal Diocese of Virginia files for "prejudgment interest" against the seven Anglican congregations in Virginia

 UPDATE: Anglican Curmudgeon has commentary on this development up now which you may read here.  The seven Virginia Anglican congregations are set to respond to the Episcopal Diocese of Virginia's motion for "Award of Prejudgment Interest" on February 9, a date set by law from the date the Episcopal Diocese of Virginia filed their Prejudgment Interest motion on  January 23.  By Virginia statute, the hearing is set for February 16th.  However, the Diocese of Virginia for some reason is seeking to rush the hearing up sooner to next Friday, February 10th, rather than the 16th as set by law.  The Anglican congregations have filed a motion opposing the attempt by the Episcopal Diocese of Virginia change the hearing date.


The local online newspaper The Patch has the story here.  The Episcopal Diocese of Virginia has filed a motion in the Fairfax Circuit Court for an "award of prejudgment interest" against the seven Anglican congregations in Virginia.

Last weekend the Episcopal Bishop of Virginia Shannon Johnston told the Annual Council meeting in Reston that regarding the recent favorable ruling over the Virginia church properties of seven of the congregations that voted to separate in 2006, "The bottom line is that just as we have been able to sustain our case throughout a lengthy and expensive legal process, I strongly believe that we will be able to do what it takes over the next months and years to be faithful to the Church’s mission with respect to each one of the properties involved."  Is this filing what he meant?

The filing also comes as The Episcopal Church's Executive Council was faced last week with a very public duel between the Presiding Bishop and the House of Deputies President over substantial budget cuts at 815, the headquarters of the national offices of The Episcopal Church.

Here is the Diocese of Virginia's filing:


MOTION FOR AWARD OF PREJUDGMENT INTEREST AND
MEMORANDUMIN SUPPORT THEREOF

The Protestant Episcopal Church in the Diocese of Virginia (the “Diocese”), by counsel,

moves the Court for an award of pre­judgment interest pursuant to Va. Code  8.01-3 02. In

support of its motion, the Diocese submits the following memorandum.

1. On January 10, 2012, this Court issued a 113 page Letter Opinion setting forth

three significant rulings in favor of the Diocese: (i) The Episcopal Church and the Diocese have

contractual and proprietary interests in each of the seven Episcopal churches that are the subject

of this litigation, and all real and personal property acquired by the churches up to the ñling date

of the declaratory judgment actions are to be conveyed promptly to the Diocese; (ii) the CANA

Congregations do not possess either contractual or proprietary interests in the property of the

seven Episcopal churches and are enjoined from further use or control of the property and must

promptly relinquish them to the Diocese; and (iii) the vestry empowered to elect directors to the

Falls Church Endowment Fund is the Episcopal vestry recognized by the Diocese. Op. at 14.

2. The Diocese is endeavoring to craft a Final Order which will encompass these

rulings and has communicated with the CANA Congregations to obtain an accounting of real and

personal property, including tangibles and intangibles such as bank deposit accounts, which have been

in their exclusive possession and control since the inception of the litigation. The parties

are attempting to reach agreement as to the sums on deposit at yarious financial institutions as of

the demarcation date identified by the Court, and the Diocese intends to identify such specific

amounts in the Final Order and have such order decree that such sums be returned to it.

3. The Diocese seeks an award of pre-judgment interest as to the liquidated sums on

deposit at various financial institutions as of the date of the Diocese’s filing of the declaratory

judgment actions. Va. Code   allows a jury or a court to “provide for interest on any

principal sum awarded . _ . and [to] fix the period at which the interest shall commence.” An

award of pre-judgment interest is completely discretionary with the trial court. Upper Occoquan

Sewage Authority v. Blake Constr. Co., 275 Va. 41, 655 S.E.2d 10 (2008); Dairyland Ins. Co. v.

Douthat, 248 Va. 627, 449 S.E.2d 799 (1994). The purpose of pre­judgment interest is to

compensate a plaintiff for the loss sustained by not receiving the amount it was entitled to and

restore the party to the position it would have occupied. Blake, 275 Va. at 63; Marks v. Sanzo,

231 Va. 350, 356 (1986). “[N]atural justice [requires] that he who has the use of another’s

money should pay interest for it.” Blake, 275 Va. at 63 (citations omitted).

4. An awarci of pre-judgment interest is appropriate here “to make the Plaintiff

whole.” Blake Constr. Co. v. Upper Occoquan Sewage Authority, 71 Va. Cir. 248 (Fairfax

2006), a/Td in part, rev ’d in part, 655 S.E.2d 10 (Va. 2008). For over five years, the Diocese

has been deprived of access to and use of the real and personal property of the seven Episcopal

churches at issue, including the amounts on deposit at various ñnancial institutions and

maintained in investment accounts. The financial sums are sizeable, ranging from several

hundred thousand dollars in the case of smaller churches such as St. Paul’s Church to several

million dollars as to The Falls Church and Truro Church. In addition to taking exclusive control

of the real property, the CANA Congregations took possession of the financial accounts and

claimed and maintained them as their own, precluding any use or application of such monies to

the spiritual and other missions of the Diocese. An award of pre­judgment interest is necessary

to make the Diocese whole and restore the Diocese to the position it was in at the time it filed the

declaratory judgment actions.

5. In concluding that the CANA Congregations do not possess either contractual or

proprietary interests in the property of the seven Episcopal Churches, the Court noted the

“pervasive control” exercised by The Episcopal Church and the Diocese over the churches. Op.

at 101. The Court emphasized the hierarchical structure of the Church and referenced “the

undeniable fact that these seven churches *were part of a hierarchical denomination for decades

and, in some cases for centuries” and that the congregations’ claims of autonomy and

independence were “contradicted by the overwhelming body of evidence before this Court.” Op.

at 101. The Court said that applying neutral principles of law, as established by United States

and Virginia Supreme Court precedents, it is “clear - indeed, to this Court, it is overwhelmingly

evident- that TEC and the Diocese have contractual and proprietary interests in the real and

personal property of each of these seven churches.” Op. at 104. The Court stressed that “whi1e

the CANA Congregations had an absolute right to depart from TEC and the Diocese, they had no

right to take these seven Episcopal churches with them.” Id. (emphasis in original) Given the

“compelling” evidence and “clear” law presented, the ultimate conclusion reached by the Court,

while disappointing to the CANA Congregations, could not have come as any surprise; and they

presumably segregated such sums and can readily turn the accounts over with the accrued

interest. See Op. at 102, 104. Moreover, that the CANA Congregations may have believed there

was a bona ñde dispute as to ownership of the real and personal property has no bearing on the

 decision whether to award pre­judgment interest. See Gill v. Rollins Protective Servs. Co., 836

F.2d 194 (4th Cir. 1987) (neither Code  8.01-3 82 nor Virginia case law makes an exception to

the general discretionary rule on pre-judgment interest for bona ñde legal disputes).

6. The amounts on deposit in various financial institutions by the seven Episcopal

churches as of the demarcation date identified by the Court (the date of the filing by the Diocese

of the various declaratory judgment actions) is easily discernible. This litigation has been

pending for over five years and the duration of the case and overwhelming evidence in favor of

the Diocese merit the award. See Tauber v. Comm. of Va., 263 Va. 520, 562 S.E.2d 1818 (2002)

(affirming decision to award prejudgment interest based on the “extended duration of this suit”

and “the overwhelming evidence in the record”). Pre-judgment interest as to these liquidated 

sums can and should be calculated and decreed to restore the Diocese to its position as of the

date of ñling the declaratory judgment actions. See Op. at 112. Pursuant to Va. Code  

the rate of pre-judgment interest is six percent.

WHEREFORE, for the foregoing reasons, the Diocese respectfully requests that the

Court order and decree that the Diocese’s request for an award of pre­judgment interest is

granted and, following entry of the Final Order, interest shall accrue at the judgment rate until paid.



BB NOTE: This is indeed sad news, but may we pause and consider prayer - we, the people of the Diocese of Virginia and the people of the Diocese of the Mid-Atlantic pray .... please pray too.  We will be able to go forward when we can trust again and know, in the depths of our hearts, that we are loved, not through our own merits, but by the merits of Jesus.  May it be so.

Lay it Down

From Matt Maher:

Update from the Diocese of Virginia Annual Council

Intrepid is on the scene.  Here is his report:

Bishop Shannon Johnston

"We are so blessed by a generous and godly heritage ..."

Bishop Shannon Johnston began with a discussion of the benefits of the size of the diocese and the ministry of the Diocesan system. He offered a strong call to a greater diocesan and institutional ministry.

"We have greater financial resources available to supply the needs of diocesan ministry ... So we can better meet the common needs and expectations ... We have ample resources to do greater ministry through our diocesan ministries ... We simply must do this, there is no reason or excuse not to ..."

He continued, "The work of the commissions and committees is strong and reaches to all  people in the diocese ... We have a much larger critical mass of people to step up and serve ... We don't have to depend on just a few to do all the diocesan ministries require."

The Bishop then mentioned that the diocese has 59 persons in formation to become ordained ministers, and another 40 people in the exploratory phase. He was very pleased that there were 99 people in this process. It left me wondering if we did not have more people in this system than the Diocese needed considering the size and number of our congregations. And it was a bit odd to think we have more people involved in the ordination process than what must be the median average congregation in the Diocese.

The Bishop then gave a report on how connected the Diocese of Virginia is to the rest of the Anglican Communion. "We are the most outward looking diocese than any other I know of."  He explained that 75 congregations are connected to 40 other churches internationally. He added, "But it's not about quantity but about the quality of relationships in mission." The goal was then given to us for more to become involved. "I am so committed to the Anglican Communion I have set the goal of having relationships with every province in the entire Anglican Communion."

Only one has to wonder about the quality of our diocesan relationships with the Anglicans in ACNA ... I am still amazed at the brash answer I received years ago from Virginia's Bishop Suffragan David Jones. I asked him why the Diocese was not willing to give letters dimissory to priests who wished to depart from the Episcopal Church but remain in the Anglican Communion. Bishop Jones explained to me that there was a "Gentleman's Agreement" among the members of the House of Bishops that no such letters would be given to those who were not actually leaving the diocese/country to take up residence in a church far away. It seemed petty at the time. But as we know, the agreement is still in force, making it hard to see how well connected we are to the rest of the AC. It also is a sad commentary on the quality of our relationships ...

The Diocese of Virginia Annual Council meets in Reston.

The Bishop continued, "Our diocese is under worldwide scrutiny ... In considering the return of Episcopal properties to the ministry of the diocese it is a big mistake to refer to this as a legal battle. It is about theology ... What is a stake is our polity, our ancient and defining order of being the church ... It is a matter of no less than our faithfulness ... And it will take more than the courts to settle things ..."

"Despite the recent court ruling in our favor we simply do not know what the future holds ... We have reason to believe our properties will be returned. For nearly two years we have considered and discussed this positive outcome. We will be fully prepared for any eventuality ... just as we have been able to sustain our case ... I strongly believe that we will be able to do what it takes over the next months and years to be faithful to the church's mission in respect to each of the properties involved. We do have what it takes ... We have the critical mass to move forward. In my mind there can be no doubt we can be up to the task ahead ..."

"We are bristling with possibilities. It is not overstating the case that this is one of the defining moments in our over 400 year history."

The Bishop also announced the creation of a new super committee called Daysprings which will have three working groups ...

• Vision and strategy for the use of the returned properties,
• Resources for funding them and,
• Messaging to communicate inside the diocese and to the world

The Bishop will announce the membership of these groups in the near future. To sum up this section of the address, the Bishop then added, "There must be a spirit of graciousness wherever and whenever possible ... No community of faith or ministry program will be thrown out of its current place." The Bishop said he was open to generous provision, creative solutions and a sense of mutuality, "while protecting the integrity of our own witness."

And he said, "I want to have a witness to the world, particularly the Anglican world, not just an outcome in the court." we wait to see to what that is a witness, but it would seem first and foremost to be a witness to the institution of the diocese and those who minister in it to make things happen. Less was said about individuals or individual parish ministry.  At times the Bishop sounded more like a man trying to get us on board than anything else. He certainly has a great love for the church as an institution. I wonder though about the value of clinging to what may soon be outmoded structures and mission priorities. Especially when the "integrity of our witness" has to do with property disputes.

And I wonder ... Should the return of properties after an expensive court battle truly be the defining event in an over 400 year history as a Diocese. I shudder to think that could be true.

Intrepid is a member of the Diocese of Virginia Annual Council now underway at the Reston Hyatt at Reston Town Center, Virginia.

UPDATE: Bishop Shannon Johnston's pastoral address is now online.  Here is an excerpt:

As all of you know, the matter of our size, resources and abilities has been–over the past five years–under worldwide scrutiny. Our diocese is navigating a complex set of circumstances regarding our effort to return Episcopal properties to the mission and ministry of the Episcopal Church in the Diocese of Virginia. It would be a big mistake to characterize this simply as a “legal” battle. Rather, at its core, this is (make no mistake about it) about theology, meaning who we are as a Church in relationship with Christ and the world. At stake is our polity, that is, our ancient and defining order of our being the Church. Thus, it is altogether a matter of nothing less than our very faithfulness. It will therefore take more than the courts to settle things. So far, our legal efforts are bearing abundant fruit, but that fruit at hand is making ecclesial life even more complex! Despite the recent court ruling in our favor, we simply don’t know now what the future holds. Nonetheless, we have reason to be more confident than ever that our properties will be returned. For nearly two years, we have considered and discussed such a positive outcome, and now we must move to put contingency plans in place. We will be fully prepared for any eventuality...

This is exactly on point in my overall theme here of the advantages of being a large diocese. The bottom line is that just as we have been able to sustain our case throughout a lengthy and expensive legal process, I strongly believe that we will be able to do what it takes over the next months and years to be faithful to the Church’s mission with respect to each one of the properties involved. And, as I’ve here been making the case, we do, in fact, have what it takes–that “critical mass”–when we all put our shoulders to the wheels. To be sure, what’s ahead will take all of us working together as a diocesan Church and ministry. We are faced quite squarely with many questions and challenges right now, but in my mind there can be no doubt: we are up to them. 

Read it all here.

Now at the Cafe: Hold Us Together

Church of England takes steps forward in building bridges with the Anglican Church in North America

The Archbishop of Canterbury and the Archbishop of York have formally released the report to the General Synod of the Church of England of their study on the continuing relationship of the Church of England (CoE) and the Anglican Church in North America (ACNA).  At the February 6-9, 2012 sessions of the Church of England Synod, Archbishop Rowan Williams and Archbishop John Sentamu reported on their findings as requested by the February 2010 Church of England Synod resolution that recognized and affirmed the ACNA's desire to remain in the Anglican family of churches.

UPDATE FROM THE ACNA from here including comments from Archbishop Bob Duncan:

Church of England General Synod Report Encourages “Open-Ended Engagement” 

The General Synod, the national assembly of the Church of England, released a report this week providing further clarity on its working relationship with the Anglican Church in North America, and encouraged an “open-ended engagement with ACNA on the part of the Church of England and the (Anglican) Communion.”

“We are encouraged by the desire of the Church of England to continue to embrace the Anglican Church in North America and remain in solidarity with us as we proclaim the Gospel message and truth as revealed in Scripture in the way it has always been understood in Anglican formularies,” said Archbishop Duncan.

The Church of England General Synod report can be viewed here.

“As we have demonstrated successfully to the GAFCON primates, the Anglican Church in North America remains committed to our growing relationships with Anglican provinces outside of North America. Our biblical orthodoxy and ministries are strengthening our bond to our Anglican brothers and sisters around the globe. We are gratified that we are already in a relationship of full communion with many Anglican Provinces and look forward to expanding that circle.”

“In that regard, we appreciate the work of the Faith and Order Commission of the Church of England, whose report and recommendations to the Archbishops of Canterbury and York form the basis of the document now released for General Synod, and whose content substantially advances the same ends with the Church of England,” concluded Archbishop Duncan.

In July 2009, a resolution was brought forth to the Church of England’s General Synod to recognize its common faith and fellowship with the growing Anglican Church in North America. The following February, 2010, representatives and ecumenical friends of the Anglican Church in North America shared directly with the General Synod the vision of the church for reaching North America with the transforming love of Jesus Christ.  At the 2010 meeting, the General Synod first affirmed the Anglican Church in North America’s desire “to remain within the Anglican family.” 

Read it all here.


Key sections are this:

15. Where then do matters currently stand concerning ACNA on each of these three issues, namely relations with the Church of England, relations with the Anglican Communion and the ability of ACNA clergy to be authorised to minister in the Church of England?

16. The Synod motion rightly began by referring to “the distress caused by recent divisions within the Anglican churches of the United States of America and Canada.” That distress, in which we share, is a continuing element in the present situation and is likely to remain so for some considerable time.

17. Wounds are still fresh. Those who follow developments in North America from some distance have a responsibility not to say or do anything which will inflame an already difficult situation and make it harder for those directly involved to manage the various challenges with which they are still grappling.

18. We would, therefore, encourage an open-ended engagement with ACNA on the part of the Church of England and the Communion, while recognising that the outcome is unlikely to be clear for some time yet, especially given the strong feelings on all sides of the debate in North America.

19. The Church of England remains fully committed to the Anglican Communion and to being in communion both with the Anglican Church of Canada and the Episcopal Church (TEC). In addition, the Synod motion has given Church of England affirmation to the desire of ACNA to remain in some sense within the Anglican family.

20. Among issues that will need to be explored in direct discussions between the Church of England and ACNA are the canonical situation of the latter, its relationship to other Churches of the Communion outside North America and its attitude towards existing Anglican ecumenical agreements.

21. Where clergy from ACNA wish to come to England the position in relation to their orders and their personal suitability for ministry here will be considered by us on a case by case basis under the Overseas and Other Clergy (Ministry and Ordination) Measure 1967.

This is a very positive development.  No door is closed, no windows are locked.  We are asked to deal gently with one another and there are those within our Episcopal and Anglican communities who are very good at speaking truth gently but firmly and building trust.  That does take time.  We do recognize, as Jesus said, that our peacemakers are blessed, and in their work they shall be called the children of God.  A sobering thought indeed.  The conversation is not over, which means the relationship is not over. It's realistic to understand that we do not know the outcome - this is indeed a walk of faith.  The topics on the table are good ones and with malice toward none and charity toward all, by the grace of God we may find a way.  


Have not yet receive official response from Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori of The Episcopal Church.  ENS based at the NY offices of the Presiding Bishop does have a story on the report here but no official reaction yet from TEC.


Below is the entire statement from here:

GENERAL SYNOD
The Church of England and the Anglican Church in North America

Church of England Synod

1. On 10 February 2010 the General Synod debated a Private Members Motion concerning the Anglican Church in North America (ACNA). The Motion passed by the Synod, incorporating an amendment moved by the Bishop of Bristol on behalf of the House of Bishops, was as follows:
   „That this Synod, aware of the distress caused by recent divisions within the Anglican churches of the United States of America and Canada,
   
   1. (a)  recognise and affirm the desire of those who have formed the
      Anglican Church in North America to remain within the Anglican
      family;
      
   2. (b)  acknowledge that this aspiration, in respect both of relations with
      the Church of England and membership of the Anglican Communion, raises issues which the relevant authorities of each need to explore further; and
      
   3. (c)  invite the Archbishops to report further to the Synod in 2011
      
2. This note constitutes our response to the request in the final part of the Synod motion. It is necessarily a report on work in progress since the consequences of the establishment of ACNA some two and a half years ago are still emerging and on a number of issues any assessment at this stage must necessarily be tentative.
   
3. We are grateful to the Faith and Order Commission (FAOC) for devoting some time to studying the relevant issues and drawing together for us a range of resources on the underlying ecclesiological questions.
   
4. As was explained in the background note prepared for the Synod debate (GS 1764B), there are at least three different sorts of question, which arise for the Church of England in considering the implications of the creation of ACNA:
   
   •   What is the range of relationship with other Christian churches that is possible for the Church of England?
     
   •   How does a particular local Church become accepted as part of the Anglican Communion?
     
   •   In what circumstances can the orders of another Church be recognised and accepted by the Church of England so that someone ordained in that church can be given archiepiscopal authorisation for ministry here?
     
5. The location of responsibility for determining each of these questions is distinct.

6. Thus, it is for the decision making bodies of the Church of England to determine the nature of its relationship with other Christian churches. Since the creation of the General Synod in 1970 the mind of the Church of England on such matters has been discerned in the General Synod, which, because issues of theology and ecclesiology are involved, necessarily looks for guidance to the House of Bishops.
   
7. This has been the case whether the issue has been about the Church of England entering into communion with another Church, as with the Porvoo Churches in the 1990s, or whether it has concerned a formal agreement of a different kind, such as the Covenant with the Methodist Church in 2003.
   
8. In relation to the second question, the concept of membership of the Anglican Communion is not entirely straightforward. The Communion itself (in common with the Church of England) has no legal personality. In addition (and unlike the Church of England) it does not have a set of canons which set out its core beliefs and regulate aspects of its internal governance.
   
9. Thus, from the time of the first Lambeth Conference in 1867, those Churches whose bishops have been invited by the Archbishop of Canterbury of the day to attend, participate fully and vote in the deliberations of the Conference have been regarded as part of the Anglican Communion.
   
10. The creation of a new legal entity in the 1960s – the Anglican Consultative Council (ACC) – created the need for a more formalised basis for membership of that body. Under the ACC‟s constitution a Church can be added to the ACC schedule of membership by decision of the Standing Committee of the Communion and with the assent of 2/3 of the primates of the Churches already listed in the schedule.
    
11. The third question- how a judgement is made over whether someone‟s orders are recognised and accepted by the Church of England- is not dependent on whether the Church from which that person comes is in communion with the Church of England or a member of the Anglican Communion.
    
12. The criteria set out in a report of 1980 from the Faith and Order Advisory Group on Episcopi Vagantes remain helpful namely:
    “. . . that the minister of ordination must be a bishop, himself validly consecrated, the recipient must have been baptised, the right matter must be used which is the laying on of hands, and the right form which consists of words of prayer referring to the special gift and showing the object of the laying on of hands.”
    
13. Thus, those ordained in other churches which accept the historic episcopate- for example the Roman Catholic Church and the Orthodox Church- may be received into the Church of England and authorised to minister, as may clergy from the Church of England in South Africa.
    

14. Authorisation by the Archbishop of the Province is considered on a case by case basis and will take a number of relevant considerations into account. It is not the case, therefore, that ordination in another Church of this kind confers any entitlement to minister here. But it does involve the conferring of orders which the Church of England is able to recognise and accept.
    
15. Where then do matters currently stand concerning ACNA on each of these three issues, namely relations with the Church of England, relations with the Anglican Communion and the ability of ACNA clergy to be authorised to minister in the Church of England?
    
16. The Synod motion rightly began by referring to “the distress caused by recent divisions within the Anglican churches of the United States of America and Canada.” That distress, in which we share, is a continuing element in the present situation and is likely to remain so for some considerable time.
    
17. Wounds are still fresh. Those who follow developments in North America from some distance have a responsibility not to say or do anything which will inflame an already difficult situation and make it harder for those directly involved to manage the various challenges with which they are still grappling.
    
18. We would, therefore, encourage an open-ended engagement with ACNA on the part of the Church of England and the Communion, while recognising that the outcome is unlikely to be clear for some time yet, especially given the strong feelings on all sides of the debate in North America.
    
19. The Church of England remains fully committed to the Anglican Communion and to being in communion both with the Anglican Church of Canada and the Episcopal Church (TEC). In addition, the Synod motion has given Church of England affirmation to the desire of ACNA to remain in some sense within the Anglican family.
    
20. Among issues that will need to be explored in direct discussions between the Church of England and ACNA are the canonical situation of the latter, its relationship to other Churches of the Communion outside North America and its attitude towards existing Anglican ecumenical agreements.
    
21. Where clergy from ACNA wish to come to England the position in relation to their orders and their personal suitability for ministry here will be considered by us on a case by case basis under the Overseas and Other Clergy (Ministry and Ordination) Measure 1967.
    

Rowan Cantuar: December 2011

Sentamu Ebor: 

Read it all here.

Today at the Cafe: At Last

Etta James (1938-2012)

Today at the Cafe: The Road Goes Ever On

Bob Dylan pays tribute to filmmaker Martin Scorsese

Bob Dylan now IS the smokey blues.

Wit and Wisdom from the Vicar of Baghdad

An amazing thing happened this past Sunday at Truro.   Canon Andrew White preached at Truro.  Scheduled far in advance, the visit of the man known as the "Vicar of Baghdad," was simply an extraordinary event, following days after the ruling by the Fairfax Circuit Court awarding the church property back to The Episcopal Church.  His message was simple, that we reach out with the love of Jesus to all.  One should be careful of those seemingly simple messages - they can be life changing.  Canon White must walk out his talk every day of his life in one of the most frightening places on the planet and he exhorted us with humor and pathos to go deep into the love of God, to reach out to those with whom we are different, those with whom we disagree, those that have hurt us, those who are unreconciled and reach out in love and marvel at what God can do when all seems lost.

Listen to his 8:30 a.m. service talk at Truro here or click below:




Also, he has done an interview in Canada and it's a must watch.  It's two parts, and the first part has all ready posted.  When Part 2 comes up I will put that up as well. 

UPDATE: Here is Part 2!

He is Risen!