Sunday, June 22, 2008

Liveblogging the GAFCON Press Conference and update on meeting between Akinola and Dawani

Matt Kennedy is in Jerusalem for GAFCON and attended the press conference today (by the way, I'm thrilled to see Cynthia Brust back at her post!). In addition to all the news, we learned more about what happened to Archbishop Akinola at the Jordanian border when he was denied entry, even though he was traveling on a diplomatic passport (imagine such a thing happening to the Archbishop of Canterbury). Here are some excerpts. Read the whole thing here.

UPDATE: You can listen to the entire press conference here. Must say, this is looking far more "open" than that gathering in Canterbury.
Archbishop Akinola: They ask us to put our bags in the screening machine. They start asking me questions about my family and my education. After three hours I was wondering what is going on. So we get phone calls. They refuse to let me enter, they give me my passport and we left. And it was a good thing. We got here early and we were able to get some very important preparation done. I was carrying a diplomatic passport and this happened to me? But it turned out to be a blessing.
We also learn that attempts have been made by some individuals in the United States and in England to entice African bishops to break with their primate and province and come to Lambeth despite the boycott:
Archbishop Akinola: The fact is this. There are bishops in Africa who have been lured with various attractive offers by certain people from America and England to come to Lambeth. "Oh, bishop, if you come to England, we will provide you with money and fine accommodations; we will provide yo with help with your projects in your diocese. What they do not realize is this: Such attempts to divide our people will not affect our churches. The polity, the constitution, and the canons of our church are clear. Bishops cannot go outside of our common decisions.
Matt identified that among the credentialed media there were representatives from gay/lesbian activist groups. They asked questions about the inhumane treatment of gays in lesbians in Islamic-dominated countries like Nigeria or Uganda or Rwanda (one wonders how they would handle questions of why Americans kill babies at their most defenseless, but nevermind). They all responded, including Archbishop Orombi to the activist/reporter:
Archbishop Orombi: The Christian faith you taught us told us what the Christian faith is. We cannot go where you want us to go without violating this faith we have received. We believe there is a possibility that God can bring you back when you sin, that you can be transformed. This makes us stand on the word of God. Way back when you go back 1886 young men were murdered because they refused to give themselves to a king sexually. Our communities culturally and where they stand is rock solid on the faith of Christianity. We believe it. We practice it. Now you call us to leave it.
There's plenty more, including the questions from the gay/lesbian advocates, as well as the New York Times and the London Times and the National Review. Read the rest of the live-blogging transcript here.

BB NOTE: Here is Anglican Archbishop of Nigeria, Peter Akinola, and the Bishop of Jerusalem, Suheil Salman Dawani in Jerusalem. Archbishop Akinola told him following services where they spoke to one another of their hopes,

Bishop Dawani told the leadership of GAFCON:
“All Christians must come here first and foremost as pilgrims – and I note that you say your coming here to Jerusalem is a ‘pilgrimage.’ Pilgrims here do not bring decisions with them. They come here to seek prayerfully the decisions God wants them to make,” said Bishop Dawani. “I pray that as you meet in this holy place, you will all be open, in real humility, to the Spirit’s guidance and that you will continue here in a spirit of peace, reconciliation and goodwill,” he continued.

Archbishop Peter Akinola responded to the welcome of Bishop Dalwani. “GAFCON is in no way a threat to you,” he said. We want to be your allies. We want to be a blessing to you… to join with you in carrying out God’s working in this part of the world.

Read the rest of the article here.

SUN. PM UPDATE: Check out an interesting and thoughtful interview with the Archbishop of Sydney who articulates the GAFCON position quite well and the Presiding Bishop of the Middle East (who does a bang-up job straightening out the BBC reporter) here. We agree with both!

London Times: Anglican Bishops meeting in Jerusalem discuss forming a "church within a church" to deal with international crisis

Ruth Gledhill is in Jerusalem. From here:

Anglican bishops meeting in Jerusalem are planning to form a “church within a church” to counter Western liberalism and to reform the Church from within.

Senior sources told The Times that the most likely outcome of the divisions over homosexuality and biblical authority was an international “Anglican Fellowship” that would provide a home for orthodox Anglicans.

It is one of the solutions to the crisis facing the Anglican Church that will be discussed by leaders of the Global Anglican Future Conference (Gafcon) meeting in Jerusalem this week. Several English bishops are among the 280 bishops and 800 clergy and laity attending.

Most of the bishops, including those from England, are boycotting next month's Lambeth Conference in protest at innovations such as gay blessings and the ordination of an openly gay bishop in the US.

The new fellowship could have a leadership of six or seven senior conservative bishops and archbishops, such as the Bishop of Pittsburgh, the Right Rev Bob Duncan — who chairs the US Common Cause partnership that acts as an umbrella for American conservatives — Archbishop Henry Orombi, Primate of Uganda, and the Church of England's Bishop of Rochester, Dr Michael Nazir-Ali.

The aim is not to split the worldwide Anglican Communion, which has 80 million members in 38 provinces, but to reform it from within. Formal ties would be maintained with the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, but fellowship members will consider themselves out of communion with the US and Canada.

Fellowship members could attempt to opt out of the pastoral care of their diocesan bishop and seek oversight from a more conservative archbishop from their own country or abroad.

The success of the fellowship in averting schism will depend on the response of local leadership. In England in 1994, many opponents of women priests were persuaded to stay in the Church after traditionalist “flying bishops” were brought in to care for them. But now they are considering leaving because of the threat to remove these safeguards with the introduction of women bishops.

In the US an entire diocese, San Joaquin, has already left the Episcopal Church and opted into the province of the Southern Cone, headed by the English-born primate, Bishop Gregory Venables, a friend of Dr Williams.

The US Church responded by filing a lawsuit to regain its property, deposing the first Bishop of San Joaquin, John Schofield, and installing Jerry Lamb as the new bishop, meaning that there are now two men calling themselves the Episcopal Bishop of San Joaquin. Dr Williams has invited both to the Lambeth Conference.

The dioceses most affected by parishes looking for more conservative leadership are understood to include Chelmsford, St Albans and Southwark.

London could also be affected, depending on how the Bishop, the Right Rev Richard Chartres, responds to the recent gay “wedding” presided over by the Rector of St Bartholomew the Great in the City. Some parishes in Durham are also interested, despite the Bishop of Durham, Dr Tom Wright, being the Church's leading evangelical scholar.

Many of the clergy likely to opt into such a fellowship will attend a meeting at All Souls, Langham Place, in London on July 1, where Archbishop Orombi and Bishop Venables are among the speakers.

Read the rest here.

LIVE from Jerusalem



.TV online : provided by Ustream


Live coverages begins at 1:00 p.m. EDT.

Anglican Archbishop Peter Akinola's Address:

GAFCON – A RESCUE MISSION

Opening Address by Archbishop Peter Akinola

Sunday 22nd June, 2008

People of the living God, welcome to Jerusalem. Welcome to GAFCON. One of the marks of apostolic ministry is signs, wonders and miracle[1]. There are many in today's Church, who would lay claim to apostolic authority without holding on to apostolic faith nor do they manifest any of the marks of the apostles. In GAFCON, I have seen signs and wonders. That we are able to gather here this week is a miracle for which we must give thanks to God.

There have been many seemingly insurmountable obstacles, but as a testimony that the Lord our God is firmly in control of GAFCON, he has graciously removed them. A conference of this magnitude would normally require several years of extensive planning, consultations and fund raising. We had barely five months to put this conference together. The Lord raised men and women who gladly and willingly offered their time, skill and money to make it happen.

I am very grateful to the members of the leadership team for their selfless and sacrificial roles in helping to deliver this conference, [please stand for recognition] We are deeply grateful to all provincial, diocesan and parish local committees, the donors, the tour agents, the travel agents, the Jordanian and Israeli governments for allowing us to meet here and in Jordan. Brethren, we appreciate the labours of love of the theological resource group. I must also thank in advance all those who will provide leadership in worship, workshops and plenary. We are heavily indebted to the various sub-committees and their leaders. God bless you all.

Why are we here? What have we come to do?

The Global Anglican Future Conference (GAFCON) holding here in the holy land this week has understandably elicited both commendation and contempt in varying measures from all who claim a stake in shaping the future identity or in destroying the traditional identity of the global Anglican Communion.

Those who failed to admit that by the unilateral actions they took in defiance of the Communion have literally torn the very fabric of our common life at it deepest level since 2003, are grumbling that we are here to break the Communion.

Similarly, those who fail, for whatever reason to come to terms with the painful reality that the Communion is in a state of brokenness and lacked the ability to secure a genuine reconciliation, but simply carried on the work of the Communion in a manner that is business as usual are not happy with us.

And of course there are those who argue that while there may be some justification for GAFCON; why not call it after Lambeth 2008.

But thanks be to God that there are millions of people around the world including members of other denominations and those of other faiths who not only share our concerns but have chosen to partner with us and are praying for us.

For those of us gathered here in the Name of the Lord, and on behalf of the over 35 million faithful Anglicans we represent[2] GAFCON is a continuation of that quiet but consistent initiative, a godly instrument appointed to reshape, reform, renew and reclaim a true Anglican Biblical orthodox Christianity that is firmly anchored in historic faith and ancient formularies.

Be that as it may, we must note that we cannot understand our present circumstance without locating it within the context of the controversies of the past decade. Every responsible historian knows that his task is predicated on the treasury of past events – rightly interpreted, as the compass for the present and guide for the future. For this reason, GAFCON takes its bearings from the tides of varied opinions and equivocations that have characterised our Communion in the last few years and exposed our once robust reputation as children of the Reformation to scorn. We were well-known for our stand on Scripture as the foundation stone of our tradition and reason.

The underlying objective of GAFCON necessarily compels a deep and honest reflection on the theological and ecclesiological inconsistencies of the past decade at the highest and most sacred levels of our Communion[3]. While not contesting the right to personal opinions and attitudes to this new situation, we must disabuse our minds of the unworthy views about GAFCON being a monster on the horizon, or even a strange breed of Anglicanism devoid of antecedent factors.

Whichever way you look at it, the Communion is deeply in trouble. This is not only because of the actions of TEC and the Anglican Church of Canada but also because the hitherto honoured Instruments of Communion, in recent years have, by design become instruments of disunity, putting the Communion in an unprecedented brokenness and turmoil.

Brethren, we spent much of our God-given precious time travelling long distances and at huge costs, meditating and praying earnestly about what we thought were common concerns, urging for a listening process while assuring people with different sexual orientation of God's love and our pastoral commitment to them, putting out carefully-worded communiqués and urging for restraint with regards to any attempt at defying time-tested limits.

PRE- LAMBETH 98

Human memory is very short. Therefore, permit me to suggest that we need to retrace our steps to some of the events that preceded Lambeth '98 when some, particularly the Global South of the Communion sensed the crisis ahead. It was the Second Anglican Encounter in the South, which was held in Kuala Lumpur from 10th -15th February 1997 with the theme, 'The Place of Scripture in the life and Mission of the Church in the 21st Century'. The theme was in the context of a premonition that the Communion was 'at a time of difficulty and confusion in some provinces and of growth, martyrdom, dynamic missionary encouragement and quiet but powerful witness in others'.

Looking back, one must confess that some of the resolutions couldn't have been more prophetic. Take for instance the Encounter's resolution about 'Scripture, the Family and Human Sexuality':

Reflection on our Encounter theme has helped further to deepen our resolve to uphold the authority of Scripture in every aspect of life, including the family and human sexuality.

Therefore:
6.1 We call on the Anglican Communion as a Church claiming to be rooted in the Apostolic and Reformed Tradition to remain true to Scripture as the final authority in all matters of faith and conduct;

6.2 We affirm that Scripture upholds marriage as a sacred relationship between a man and a woman, instituted in the creation ordinance;

6.3 We reaffirm that the only sexual expression, as taught by Scripture, which honours God and upholds human dignity is that between a man and a woman within the sacred ordinance of marriage;

6.4 We further believe that Scripture maintains that any other form of sexual expression is at once sinful, selfish, dishonouring to God and an abuse of human dignity;

6.5 We are aware of the scourge of sexual promiscuity, including homosexuality, rape and child abuse in our time. These are pastoral problems, and we call on the Churches to seek to find a pastoral and scriptural way to bring healing and restoration to those who are affected by any of these harrowing tragedies.

This Second Trumpet was used by God to make the majority of the Bishops who participated in the Lambeth Conference 1998 stand together to assert the authority of the Bible against the revisionist agenda that was being peddled then.

Post-Lambeth Reactions

Paradoxically, that which was universally hailed as the triumph of biblical truth was, soon after the Lambeth Conference, lamented by a self-conceited typical American bishop, Jack Spong of Newark (now retired) as a disastrous condescension to stone-age logic. He actually said that the Africans were theologically "animistic and superstitious" and ignorant of scientific advancement. Lest some interpret this as a racial rather than a doctrinal issue, Barbara Harris (a black), Suffragan Bishop of Massachusetts, even said the African Bishops' loyalty had been "bought with chicken dinners" by the conservative American Anglican Council. Of course, these slanders were calmly repudiated by noted African voices such as my most worthy predecessor- The Most Rev. Joseph Adetiloye, who said: "We in Africa hold the Bible as our authority for the Christian life. Therefore we will stand by the Word of God. To do otherwise, I'm afraid, would be impossible…"

Many American revisionist dioceses and congregations withdrew their financial assistance to needy African dioceses. Responding to this development, Bishop John Rucyahana of Rwanda who had been affected by that action said, "This has happened to many other African countries and African churches. Our opinion and independence of mind is being choked by [patronising generosity] via the gifts of money. That is manipulation and dehumanizing to think we will do what people want because they have money."

Clearly the bedrock of the revisionist perspective is the humanist, rather than theological approach. This is the crux of the problem: they are going in the opposite direction from what Biblical orthodoxy demands, and with such a mindset, a meeting-point with those who are labelled conservatives – who have chosen to stand where the Bible stands, becomes a very remote possibility.

Crossing the 'Rubicon'

Between the Lambeth Conference in 1998 and 2003, several dioceses in the Episcopal Church (ECUSA) continued with impunity to legitimise open same-sex unions. The election and proposed consecration, in 2003, of a man in an active homosexual relationship, Gene Robinson as Bishop of New Hampshire in defiance of Resolution 1:10 of Lambeth 98, inflicted the most devastating wound on the pastorally responsible listening process recommended by that conference. Throughout the Communion, there was widespread outcry against that proposal. For ease of reference the text of Lambeth Resolution 1.10 is appended to this address.

The Primates' meeting in October 2003 at Lambeth Palace discussed this development with deep concern and came up with this statement:

"We … re-affirm the resolutions made by the bishops of the Anglican Communion gathered at the Lambeth Conference in 1998 on issues of human sexuality as having moral force and commanding the respect of the Communion as its present position on these issues. We commend the report of that Conference in its entirety to all members of the Anglican Communion valuing especially its emphasis on the need "to listen to the experience of homosexual persons,..."

"Therefore, as a body we deeply regret the actions of the Diocese of New Westminster and the Episcopal Church (USA) which appear to a number of provinces to have short-circuited that process, and could be perceived to alter unilaterally the teaching of the Anglican Communion on this issue. They do not. Whilst we recognise the juridical autonomy of each province in our Communion, the mutual interdependence of the provinces means that none has authority unilaterally to substitute an alternative teaching as if it were the teaching of the entire Anglican Communion.

"To this extent, therefore, we must make clear that recent actions in New Westminster and in the Episcopal Church (USA) do not express the mind of our Communion as a whole, and these decisions jeopardise our sacramental fellowship with each other…

At that point, the red lights were unmistakable and the appropriate note of caution was sounded by the Primates:

"If his consecration proceeds, we recognise that we have reached a crucial and critical point in the life of the Anglican Communion and we have had to conclude that the future of the Communion itself will be put in jeopardy. In this case, the ministry of this one bishop will not be recognised by most of the Anglican world, and many provinces are likely to consider themselves to be out of Communion with the Episcopal Church (USA). This will tear the fabric of our Communion at its deepest level, and may lead to further division on this and further issues as provinces have to decide in consequence whether they can remain in Communion with provinces that choose not to break Communion with the Episcopal Church (USA).

Sadly, in spite of the Primates' godly admonition, prophetic and timely warning the consecration went ahead. This singular defiant action put our Communion in total disarray as some provinces like West Indies and Southern Cone declared a state of impaired Communion with ECUSA and others like Uganda, South East Asia, Kenya, Rwanda and Nigeria broke off sacramental communion with it.

It was now clear that ECUSA by its own deliberate action had made its choice to walk apart from the rest of the Communion.

For most of us, this was the point when the truth of the African proverb that "a dog that is heading for self-destruction stops heeding the hunter's whistle" became clear. We also recalled the question posed by Prophet Amos, "Do two walk together except they have agreed to do so?"[4]

Some people interpreted our response as a judgmental attitude, but we knew we had come to that point when we had to stand up for our convictions based on the word of God and the faithful witness of a long succession of Anglicans, rather than fall for anything in the name of enlightened logic and dictates of modern cultural trappings.

Meetings and More Meetings

More efforts were still made in an attempt to manage the crisis, and we remember in particular the Dromantine meeting of the Primates in 2005 where ECUSA and Canada were given time to respond to the questions put to them by the Windsor report and also to consider their place within the Anglican Communion[5].

To our utter dismay, it became apparent that our sober resolutions were, in the aftermath, trivialized by some of our most respected leaders. As if that was not bad enough, our corporate integrity was abused and the pains and concerns shared so open-mindedly ridiculed and betrayed by the flagrant compromises of those entrusted with the responsibility of guarding divine and eternal truths. These rather reckless departures from our painstaking resolutions turned delicate matters into what became more of a pastime for merely pious rhetoric at the expense of the spiritual welfare of our Communion which was evidently in jeopardy.

In the light of this, the Conference of Anglican Provinces of Africa (CAPA) commissioned a group that came up with The Road to Lambeth which was endorsed by several Provinces[6] including Nigeria.

The last major meeting that considered this issue was the Primates' Meeting in Tanzania in February 2007. After long and painful hours of deliberations the primates gave TEC a last chance to clarify unequivocally and adequately their stand by 30th September, 2007.

Strangely, before the deadline, and before the Primates could get the opportunity of meeting to assess the adequacy of the response of TEC and in a clear demonstration of unwillingness to follow through our collective decisions which for many of us was an apparent lack of regard for the Primates, Lambeth Palace in July 2007 issued invitations to TEC bishops including those who consecrated Gene Robinson to attend the Lambeth 2008 conference.

At this point, it dawned upon us, regrettably, that the Archbishop of Canterbury was not interested in what matters to us, in what we think or in what we say.

For the avoidance of doubt, I need to reiterate the most agonizing part of it all which is the fact that thrice, in the course of these crises, we have met as Primates of the Communion and have been unable in good conscience on each occasion to share in the Lord's Supper with leaders of TEC and the Anglican Church of Canada. What else can more powerfully and most vividly demonstrate our brokenness? No solution has been found to this fundament issue. Until sacramental communion is restored, we remain sadly, broken. This is the stark reality our leaders continue to ignore and of course to the peril of the Communion.

As the Lambeth Conference 2008 approached and invitations were being sent out as though it was business as usual, some of our Provinces counselled the Archbishop of Canterbury to consider shifting the date[7] until the time for a meaningful fellowship and healing of relationships could be discerned. In addition, it would give the provinces of the Communion space to conclude and ratify the draft Anglican Covenant. Rejecting all entreaties, Lambeth Palace chose not to be bothered about that which troubles us; decided to stick to its own plans and to erect the walls of 2008 Lambeth Conference on the shaky and unsafe foundations of our brokenness.

Why GAFCON?

We cannot succumb to this turmoil in our Communion and simply watch helplessly. We have found ourselves in a world in which Anglican leaders hold on to a form of religion but consistently deny its power. We have a situation in which some members of the Anglican family think they are so superior to all others that they are above the law, they can do whatever they please with impunity. As a Communion we have been unable to exercise discipline. In the face of global suspicion of the links of Islam with terrorism, Lambeth Palace is making misleading statements about the Islamic Law, Shari a, to the point that even secular leaders are now calling us to order! We can no longer trust where some of our Communion leaders are taking us.

Repeatedly, those of us in the leadership team of GAFCON have been advised by all levels of our ecclesial structures to avoid a vacuum. All our bishops and wives who would normally look to the Lambeth Conference for fellowship but now could not along with senior lay leaders and selected clergy to whom Lambeth authorities are not willing to listen should meet in another forum for prayerful deliberation on matters critical to our common life and mission. Thus GAFCON is a rescue mission.

Our beloved Anglican Communion must be rescued from the manipulation of those who have denied the gospel and its power to transform and to save; those who have departed from the scripture and the faith 'once and for all delivered to the saints' from those who are proclaiming a new gospel, which really is no gospel at all, {Gal 1.} In the wisdom and strength God supplies we must rescue what is left of the Church from error of the apostates.

Brethren, we are here

Ø Because we are bound together in a godly fellowship by the Gospel-the gospel that shaped the theological and ecclesiological foundations of our Church-the same gospel with its transforming power that made the difference in the lives of our heroes like Thomas Cranmer, William Wilberforce, the Clapham brothers and Ajayi Crowther.

Ø Because we are convinced that GAFCON is a veritable tool within the Communion which God is using to bring together all who are concerned not only about the need to preserve the faith, but also to persevere and bequeath a legacy of wholesome, undiluted faith to future generations of Anglicans. It is God's gift to the Anglican Communion and to the world.

Ø To draw fresh inspiration to enable us 'contend for the faith once and for all delivered to the saints' both for our sake and for the sake of future generations of Anglicans.

Ø Because we want to renew our commitment to our sacred duty to preserve and proclaim uncompromisingly, the undistorted word of God written to a sinful and fragmented world. GAFCON is a meeting of ordained and lay leaders concerned about the mission of the Church and how best to carry it out and be poised to address the ever-present challenges of self-reliance, good governance, overcoming corruption and to prepare a strong and stable platform for upcoming generations.

Ø Yes, GAFCON offers fresh hope for a meaningful spiritual haven for orthodox Anglicans who can no longer hold out and be truly Anglican under revisionist leadership.

Ø We are here because we know that in God's providence GAFCON will liberate and set participants [particularly Africans] free from spiritual bondage which TEC and its Allies champion. Having survived the inhuman physical slavery of the 19th century, the political slavery called colonialism of the 20th century, the developing world economic enslavement, we cannot, we dare not allow ourselves and the millions we represent be kept in religious and spiritual dungeon.

Ø Because we know that together as lay leaders, clergy and bishops of our Church we can banish the errors plaguing our beloved Communion-for we will not abdicate our God-given responsibility and simply acquiesce to destructive modern cultural and political dictates.

Ø We are here because we know that in spite of the fractures in our Communion, as orthodox Anglicans, we have a future and so we are here in the holy land to inaugurate and determine the roadmap to that future.

And from what better place in the world could we take the fullest advantage of the most powerful reminders of the life and ministry of our Lord and only Saviour Jesus the Christ than here in the holy land where he was born, grew up, served; was killed, rose again for our justification, ascended to heaven and now seated at the right hand of God the Father, interceding for us.

It was here in the holy land that our Lord Jesus the Christ of God gave the command to go and proclaim the sacred message of salvation and to disciple those who believe. From here, brethren, the recipient Church in the power of the Holy Spirit went out to the world and began the gradual process of its transformation.

So far, I have tried to address the whole question of 'why and how' we got to where we are in the life of our beloved Anglican Communion. The challenge we must now address is, where do we go from here and what is the roadmap for that journey? As we participate in the various workshops and plenary sessions, I ask that we give some prayerful consideration to the following questions:

In the light of the fact that the Communion is in a state of brokenness in fellowship and sacrament, are we reconcilable; is there anything that can be done which has not been articulated for the restoration of sacramental Communion?

A sizeable part of the Communion is in error and not a few are apostate; is the Communion correctable from within or must it be from without?

A growing number of our people are already talking about what they call 'unavoidable realignment' for the rescue operation within the Communion; is that the best way forward and if not, what are the alternatives?

To some, GAFCON is the metamorphosis of CAPA and the Global south. Is it? Put in another way, what is the place of CAPA and the Global south which historically antedate GAFCON in an all-embracing and truly global GAFCON?

We know that the expert 'divide and rule' agents of TEC and Lambeth have been at work using money and other attractions to buy 'silence and compromise' from some gullible African and Global South Church leaders; hence we have begun to see signs of disunity in our ranks. How do we forestall this danger in GAFCON?

Can we here begin to discern the content and nature of that future we long to see and work for as Anglicans?

What sort of recognisable structure and funding must GAFCON as a 'movement' in the Communion have to be able achieve the tasks set for it?

As I conclude let the world be informed that be it by birth or by conversion the men and women in GAFCON are people who have grown to be Anglican Christians by conviction, upholding the tenets of Anglican biblical orthodoxy. We have no other place to go nor is it our intention to start another church. Anglicans we are, Anglicans we'll remain until the LORD shall return in glory to judge each one according to his deeds.

And finally fellow pilgrims it goes without saying that we have committed so much prayer and material resources to this conference and pilgrimage. We have not come here to fantasise or day dream. This is the land in which the LORD our God manifested his glory and power in concrete actions in empirical history.

The programme, painstakingly designed with you in mind, is therefore fairly elaborate with variety of activities such as pilgrimage to holy sites, liturgical worship, devotional prayer sessions, workshops, Bible study and several plenary sessions. I urge you; please make GAFCON a worthwhile event. Be involved. Be punctual in attending all sessions. Participate fully and actively. Only by so doing can we together this week here in the holy land, come up with practical, realistic and actionable decisions that will honour God and bring blessing to our Communion. Let us walk, work and pray together here in Jerusalem to inaugurate that glorious future of the Anglican Communion.

And now to the King Immortal, Invisible, the only wise God be all honour, glory, dominion and majesty, for ever and ever. Amen.

BBC/London Telegraph Reporting: Church of England bishops will boycott Lambeth

BB NOTE: This isn't exactly new news - but perhaps the media is now starting to tune in. The BBC story is here. Original article from the London Telegraph is here. Video report is here with a prediction that a civil war is breaking out in the Church of England. For those who may have forgotten, the final decision for the appointment of the Archbishop of Canterbury was between Rowan Williams and Michael Nazir-Ali. Stay tuned.

Don't miss this - Anglican Theologian NT Wright pops up on the Comedy Channel



"The great thing about Anglicans is that we have no theology of our own. If something is true, then Anglicans believe it." -N.T. Wright

Saturday, June 21, 2008

Rowan Williams writes on expectations of the Lambeth Conference

From here.

Thursday 19 June 2008

Article in Outlook, the Canterbury Diocesan Newsletter

What's actually going to happen at the Lambeth Conference? Well, I have no crystal ball to tell me exactly what the outcomes will be. But what I most hope and pray is that we emerge from the quite intensive programme with the two main goals taken forward – having gained more confidence about our Communion and having helped to give bishops more resources for their primary work of serving the Church in mission.

But what we can say a bit about is the way in which the business is going to be done. The programme, devised by a very gifted and dedicated international team, responds to the widely felt concerns that we ought to get away from too 'parliamentary' and formal a style. It's going to be important that no-one goes home feeling they haven't ever been listened to. So it's important to devise structures that guarantee everyone has a chance to be heard. It's also crucial to build the sort of trust that allows deep and passionate differences to be stated and explored together, with time allowed for getting past the slogans and the surface emotions.

So the new thing about Lambeth this time is that the whole body of the bishops will be divided into middle-sized groups, called 'indaba' groups, from a Zulu word describing community discussion and decision-making.

BB NOTE: Who is going to "divide" the bishops "into middle-sized groups?" Will the bishops have the freedom to chose their own groups or will that be decided by someone else? If so, who? And what will be their strategic plan in dividing the bishops into groups?

In these groups of forty or so, expert facilitators will be enabling the kind of discussion in which everyone has a chance to speak;

BB NOTE: Who are these so-called "expert" facilitators? What is their theological persuasion? Are they Christians? What is their faith commitment? What is their political commitment? What is their agenda? Who picked these so-called "expert" facilitators? What instructions have they been given - and by whom?

...and people will be given the responsibility of reporting on behalf of each group, so that over the two weeks of work there will be a lot of attention given to how what comes out of the groups can be woven together in a final statement.

BB NOTE: What people? Who will decided which people? Who will edit the "reporting on behalf of each group?" Will all forty members have the chance to edit the "reporting on behalf of each group?" Will they get to review the "reporting on behalf of each group?" What if they disagree with the "reporting on behalf of each group?"

This work by the 'reporters' will be offered for public discussion at a number of points in the Conference so that anyone who wishes can give some feedback ...

BB NOTE: And again, who are the "reporters?" How will they be chosen? Will they be elected? Will there be several choices? How will the "public discussion" be managed? How will the bishops know when the "number of points" is occurring? What does Rowan mean by "feedback?" Do they get an edited copy of the "report" or do they just swap howdies over tea?

... as the Conference works towards its final reflections.

BB NOTE: So now it's called "final reflections" instead of a report. Who will write the "final reflections?" Who will edit the "final reflections?" Who cares about "final reflections?" We have been reflecting for thirty years - isn't this a tactic to keep these bishops busy to do nothing? Or is it opening up the opportunity to suck the bishops into mire? Is that why there are rumors that the Bishop of Rochester is not going to go - because the bishops are being managed and forsaking their duties as bishops to guard the faith?

Each 'indaba' group brings together a number of smaller Bible study groups, who will be studying John's Gospel each day.

BB NOTE: What does he mean by "study?" Are there questions? Who is writing the questions? Are they "studying" the entire book or just bits? Who gets to decide?

And the hope is that through these small and medium-sized groups, which will stay together throughout the Conference, real relationships will be formed across various boundaries.

BB NOTE: So much for freedom of association! Now the bishops are going to be herded into managed groups put together by people whose names we do not know and with strategic planning we do not know to produce reports written by people we do not know to produce reflections for what reason? Will the bishops just blindly walk into this, nodding and smiling into a massive effort of Group Think?

We've also tried to make sure that there is proper provision in groups for the various languages represented among the Bishops and their wives.

BB NOTE: Ah, but not their husbands? Oops.

The whole event begins with a couple of days' retreat, based in the Cathedral. We learn how to listen to each other by listening to God, quietly and patiently and thankfully; and I pray very earnestly that this opening experience will set the tone for the work that follows.

BB NOTE: Who is going to teach this maneuver to keep the bishops nice and in order and without raise voices or any real passion or conviction? Isn't this how introverts operate? By keeping everything quiet? Doesn't he realize that there are Americans and Australians in the room - or will they be shushed and shuttered with duck tape over their mouths?

Of course it will be a profoundly challenging time for us all.

BB NOTE: The understatement of the year.

Much depends on our willingness to work hard and to be ready to move closer to each other instead of staying in our own familiar territory.

BB NOTE: No, much of it depends on the bishops entering into a Group Think Experience at the expense of their own conscience and convictions.

The Church always seeks a common commitment, not just an assortment of individual beliefs. And that isn't a sort of tyranny; it's a reminder that in biblical terms the truth we come to know is known in and through the Body of Christ, not by any of us in isolation. That's the truth that will set us free.

BB NOTE: Ah, but is not the Church made up of individuals with convictions who band together with those of common vision - and is not this conference attempting to dismantle those freedom groups in favor of Group Think? The truth indeed does set us free - to be ourselves and not to be subject to manipulation, even with the best of intentions. Does it not sound as though Rowan does not trust these bishops to behave and so is imposing strict limits on their engagements with one another in order to manage a chaotic situation?

I'm delighted and very grateful indeed that the people of this diocese have been so generous and enthusiastic about Lambeth. As I wrestle with so many of the organisational and other problems, it's a great gift to go to a parish at the weekend and see the posters about Lambeth and hear people being encouraging about help and hospitality. I feel that the diocese, including in a special way the Cathedral, is really modelling for the Communion a positive and welcoming spirit, and I must say a very heartfelt than you for this.

Please go on praying; may God help us all to meet and work and pray together in a way that gives him glory and offers hope and good news to his world.

BB NOTE: Amen.

With my love always

+Rowan

Saturday Afternoon at the Cafe

Make a Note: Here's the GAFCON Schedule

Here's the GAFCON published schedule.

Saturday, June 21
4:00pm – 6:00pm GAFCON Registration Desk Open

Sunday, June 22
11:00am – 5:00pm GAFCON Registration Desk Open
3:00pm – 5:30pm - Israel Museum, Shrine of the Book (Dead Sea Scrolls)
7:00pm Welcome Dinner
8:00pm Welcome Session - The Most Rev. Peter Akinola

Monday, June 23
7:00am - 12 noon Pilgrimage to the Mount of Olives / Gethsemane
1:00pm Lunch
2:00pm Opening Service of Holy Communion
Keynote Address: Jesus Christ as Lord - The Most Rev. Henry Orombi
5:00pm - The Gospel and Secularism -Dr. Os Guinness
7:30pm Dinner
9:30pm End of day of Prayers

Tuesday, June 24
8:30am Worship and Exposition - Genesis 12: The Promise of God
9:45am Discussion and Prayer
11:00am Workshops - including “Gospel and Leadership,” “Evangelism & Church Planting,” “Anglican Identity in the 21st Century” and others
1:00pm Lunch
2:00pm - 4:00pm - Seminar - Addressing HIV/Aids
5:00pm - The Nature and Future of the Anglican Communion - Rt. Rev. Michael Nazir-Al
7:30pm Dinner
9.30pm End of day of Prayers

Wednesday, June 25
8:30am Worship and Exposition - Exodus 24: The Presence of God
9:45am Discussion and Prayer
11:00am Workshops - including “Gospel and Leadership,” “Evangelism & Church Planting,” “Anglican Identity in the 21st Century” and others
1:00pm Lunch
2:00pm Pilgrimage to Old City, Tower of David, Jewish Quarter, and homes of the Sadducees
4:00pm Pilgrimage gathers at Ophel Gardens
7:00pm Dinner
8:00pm The Gospel and Religion - Dr. Salim Munayer, and Mr. Evan Thomas

Thursday, June 26
8:30am Worship and Exposition – 2 Samuel 1 – 17: The King of God
9:45am Discussion and Prayer
11:00am Workshops - including “Gospel and Leadership,” “Evangelism & Church Planting,” “Anglican Identity in the 21st Century” and others
1:00pm Lunch
2:00pm - 4:00pm - Touring
5:00pm - Enterprise Solutions to Poverty - Mr. Kim Tan, Mr. Andrew Tanswell, Mr. Jerry Marshall and Daniel Muvengi
7:30pm Dinner
9:30pm End of day of Prayers

Friday, June 27
8:30am Worship and Exposition - Luke 24: The Son of God
9:45am Discussion and Prayer
11:00am Workshops - including “Gospel and Leadership,” “Evangelism & Church Planting,” “Anglican Identity in the 21st Century” and others
1:00pm Lunch
2:00pm - 4:00pm Plenary Session
5:00pm Pilgrimage to Church of the Holy Sepulchre OR
Tour of modern and biblical Jerusalem by coach
7:30pm Dinner
9:30pm End of day of Prayers

Saturday, June 28
7:30am All day pilgrimage to Bethlehem and Galilee
Mount of Beatitudes Address - Jesus the Galilean – Jesus Teaches - Archbishop Elias Chacour

Sunday, June 29
8:30am Worship and Exposition - Revelation 21 The Throne of God
11:00am Closing Service of Holy Communion
Kenote Address - Jesus is Lord - Archbishop Greg Venables
1:00pm Closing Lunch

Friday, June 20, 2008

GAFCON starts tomorrow, friends

Golly, the conference in Jerusalem hasn't even started yet and so many on the left side of the press room all ready have their huggies in a wad. They are busy tolling the Death Knell and Matt Kennedy isn't even there yet, for heaven's sake.

Here's a gathering today of the editorial board of the London Telegraph just before Elevenses.



It might be better if they just settle down and sleep it off. All this sound and fury of the past couple of days - and the heart of the meetings don't actually begin until Sunday or Monday - seems a bit, well, exaggerated.

Thursday, June 19, 2008

Send BabyBlue to Lambeth

An invitation has been extended from across the Big Pond to cover the Lambeth Conference in Canterbury. I have finally said yes and booked my flight.

Of course, it's down to the wire and I've been praying up a storm over the past few months if I should go to Lambeth and cover it as I have other church gatherings, General Conventions, House of Bishops meetings, Diocesan Councils - the usual - over the past fifteen years. Rang up the trusty Travel Agent yesterday and nearly lost my lunch over the price of the airfare, though. Wow. But here we go.

If Cafe patrons - liberal and conservative alike - think it's a good idea to send me to Lambeth to blog from sunrise to sunset - and beyond, would you consider clicking the button below?

My hope and prayer is to do what I've done at other meetings - try as best as I can to tell the story of what I see and hear and learn and to do it in a way that may help you feel like you are there. What I hope to do is to help get the true story out, as best as I can. That is my goal.

I'll be doing regular live blogging, video casting, posting photos, YouTube videos, interviews, and podcasting as I have in the past.

So there you are - the button to donate at PayPal is below and I'll put this button over in the links column as well. If you'd like to send BabyBlue to Lambeth, whatever you'd like to give is greatly appreciated - please know that. Please feel free to post your comments and if you have any questions, please also feel free to e-mail me at BabyBlueAnglican@aol.com.

But even more than that - please pray. Greater is He than is in us then he that is in the world. Or on the plane. I pledge to serve you as best as I can, you wonderful, wonderful people who drop by the Cafe, with all your thoughts, your ideas, your passion for life, for the Church, for Jesus - and sometimes even for Bob Dylan. Thank you for making this place a unique spot on the Anglican front. I learn so much from all of you.

I do hope you will join me - at least here at the Cafe - at Lambeth. To God be the glory.

Yes, I want to send
BabyBlue
to Lambeth





UPDATE: I've sent in my press credential forms - so we're getting ready. I've covered four out of five General Conventions and the House of Bishops meeting in New Orleans from the press room. Right now I plan to fly into London and take a bus (rather than a train) to Canterbury. I'll be traveling with a copy of Jack Kerouac's On The Road. Don't you know that "God is Pooh Bear," as Kerouac writes, but He sure can get bounced down the stairs a lot.

Episcopal Church near site of 2009 General Convention holds wedding of two men in the Episcopal Diocese of Los Angeles

Presided by the rector of All Saints, Pasadena, gay activist Mel White gets married to his male partner in an wedding ceremony in an Episcopal Church in the Diocese of Los Angeles yesterday. All Saints is within a stone's throw of the scheduled 2009 General Convention. The Bishop of Los Angeles, Jon Bruno continues to look the other way in defiance. Looks like we have a full-scale political uprising underway in these weeks leading up to Lambeth.

Wednesday, June 18, 2008

Confirmed: Archbishop Peter Akinola denied entry into Jordan

Our sources confirm that Anglican Archbishop Peter Akinola was denied entry into Jordan.








Interesting little story here.


FRIDAY UPDATE: The New York Times is now reporting that Archbishop Drexel Gomez of the West Indies was also denied entry into Jordan. Archbishop Gomez is the chair of the Covenant Design Committee.

The Lambeth equivalent of the "October Surprise" in June

It is now clear that the wedding was a political time bomb set to go off as the Lambeth equivalent of an "October Surprise." What we see here is a rector who kept this impending wedding a secret so that there would be maximized media coverage (forget the idea that this is just a mere "distraction," Bishop Chartres) - this is the type of street politics that has been underway in the U.S. churches. We didn't become refugees out of our Episcopal homes for nothing. Learn from our mistakes, sir - this is the real thing and they take no prisoners. You either deal with it swiftly (and be ready for what will happen to you, as has happened to Peter Akinola) or attempt to sweep it away as a distraction. Welcome to our world, sir.

Richard Chartres, the Bishop of London, has written a stern letter to the rector of the church where the wedding of two male priests was conducted. Unfortunately, as we see in the posting below this one, he has appointed a buddy of Martin Dudley - not exactly impartial is he? Either that is an attempt to sweep this under the rug in time for Lambeth and to keep sleeping giants like this or this in the fold, or to place such personal pressure on the rector (which in England they call a vicar) as to cause him to fold in contrition. Guess we'll see.

Here's the letter:

Dear Martin,

You have sought to justify your actions to the BBC and in various newspapers but have failed more than two weeks after the service to communicate with me.

I read in the press that you had been planning this event since November. I find it astonishing that you did not take the opportunity to consult your Bishop.

You describe the result as “familiar words reordered and reconfigured carrying new meanings.” I note that the order of service, which I have now received, includes the phrase “With this ring I thee bind, with my body I thee worship”.

At first sight this seems to break the House of Bishops Guidelines which as I explained in my letter of December 6th 2005 apply the traditional teaching of the Church of England to the new circumstances created by the enactment of Civil Partnerships.

The point at issue is not Civil Partnerships themselves or the relation of biblical teaching to homosexual practice. There is of course a range of opinion on these matters in the Church and, as you know, homophobia is not tolerated in the Diocese of London. The real issue is whether you wilfully defied the discipline of the Church and broke your oath of canonical obedience to your Bishop.

The Archbishops have already issued a statement in which they say that “those clergy who disagree with the Church’s teaching are at liberty to seek to persuade others within the Church of the reasons why they believe, in the light of Scripture, tradition and reason that it should be changed. But they are not at liberty simply to disregard it.”

St Bartholomew’s is not a personal fiefdom. You serve there as an ordained minister of the Church of England, under the authority of the Canons and as someone who enjoys my licence. I have already asked the Archdeacon of London to commence the investigation and I shall be referring the matter to the Chancellor of the Diocese. Before I do this, I am giving you an opportunity to make representations to me direct.

Yours faithfully.

The Rt Revd & Rt Hon Richard Chartres DD FSA

Yes, this was the Lambeth equivalent of

London Times reports "investigator" appointed by Bishop of London is buddies with Church of England rector under investigation

Oh what tangled webs we weave. From Ruth Gledhill of the London Times:
Yes, it is the case that the Bishop of London has asked the Archdeacon of London to investigate. But I don't think Bart's Rector, Fr Martin Dudley, will be too worried. The Archdeacon was an honoured guest at his recent birthday party, and the two are great friends.
Read the rest here.

Tuesday, June 17, 2008

Smashing the Silos and Tearing down the Walls

It seems to me that the four quadrants we see in the political test that Mark Harris alludes to here at the Cafe and elsewhere is closer to the truth then Graham Kings' quadrants, or what I might describe as Graham's Silos.

In the four political quadrants you have degrees of residence, it's not a done deal. Above the horizontal axis you have what I might call those who primarily desire Order (Authoritarian) and below the axis you have those who I might say primarily desire Freedom (Libertarians).

What Graham Kings' graph doesn't account for is the fact that orthodox Episcopalians and those who have separated from TEC remain in Communion with one another - not just ecclesiastically but also relationally - we have moved out of our silos.

For example, I received communion at the Diocese of Virginia's Diocesan Council earlier this year - though in court with the Diocese of Virginia, I take communion in the Diocese of Virginia. I've taken Communion several times in Episcopal Churches this year, including other churches in the Diocese of Virginia and the Diocese of Washington. But this is understandable, not from Graham's Silos but because politically I'm below the horizontal axis. I am more politically libertarian than authoritarian. What matters to me are the relationships, not who owns the chalice.

The events of recent days in London of the marriage between two ordained men in the COE Church was done by those who are also probably below the horizontal axis, though over on the far left toward the anarchy side. Their actions are more akin to exerting their freedom than in upholding Order, as the terse statement that came from Canterbury and York illustrates. In fact, it appears to be their intention to set off an explosion (oh I know, they say "who little ole me?" but that's just part of the crazymaking) not only at those who have opposing theological views (i.e. Gafcon and Reformed) - but those who in fact hold the same theological views as they do but retreat into Order - like Rowan Williams.

Rowan Williams is on the left politically, but is an institutionalist so is above the horizontal axis. In fact, he's diagonally across from me (I just don't know how far in). He will frustrate all of us - conservative or progressive who are below the horizontal axis, whether we are aligned with Integrity on the Left or GAFCON on the Right. We all don't know how far up the grid he is or if he might at any moment cross the line. The activists in London set off a bomb to see where he might land. His statement with York indicates he's not that far in, but he's in. Rowan will preserve order over freedom.

It is then no wonder that those who are theologically conservative but above the horizontal axis - like Graham Kings or John Howe - would do all they can to support Rowan Williams because they are both devoted to Order. They live above the horizontal axis on the right. That makes them natural allies with others above the axis, even if they are on the left.

I find this way of thinking - as much as I often grieve over the politicization of the church - as frankly a more accurate - and creative - way of understanding not only our differences, but also how we can sometimes surprisingly find ourselves allies or at least friends when we least expect it. We can be diligent when one quadrant is pitted against another and recognize it for the political strategic decision is is. In my case, the enemy of my enemy may also be my enemy. And that can be plenty surprising.

It was a discovery to see that Mark Harris is also below the horizontal axis and closer to what I might term the "Freedom" side then the "Order" side (you can take the test here). How close we find ourselves to the vertical line might denote that we have some common ground - as I know we do since we both support Five Talents, for example.

The preaching of hierarchical structures by 815 has been a big surprise to me since I assumed that that all the progressives were below the horizontal line - that they were more aligned to freedom than order - sometimes to anarchy. But this has not been the case in TEC - where at least in the legal and canonical theatre, those aligned with 815 are in the upper left quadrant, politically liberal but authoritarian. They are preaching structures over relationships, they are not political libertarians. This is quite illuminating.

It helps explain why they can find John Howe a useful ally since he is also above the horizontal line, but on the right. He too craves Order over Freedom. That can come in handy if imposing Order is your primary concern. But it can cause tremendous rebellion as well, as Great Britain found out in 1776.

It is clear then that if you are above the horizontal line, you will want to gain security by pitting the two sides below the line at each other. That would mean you have a battle in the streets between what I guess we could call the Integrity lobby (and all their many facades and umbrella organizations) and GAFCON. If these two wings fight with one another into oblivion (blessings vs border crossings) then those above the line step back and watch the rest implode and pick up the spoils.

In that way, 815 could be encouraging the political antics of the left - hoping it will inflame those on the right into public blood baths of the messy kind and in doing so, rise above the fray and impose order as a solution to the chaos - the Episcopal Communion. But that may not be what those who desire freedom will want in the long run. At some point, all the orthodox will be gone and then what? How much will those who desire Order first tolerate those who desire Freedom first? Getting the marriage certificate and the consecration may not be everything one bartered for in the end.

For those of us who continually pray for a peaceful resolution - or even a peaceful cease fire - it's clear that if Order is your primary focus, then this is not going to happen. It can't - because Order is the dominant value. Seeking peace means tolerating a certain amount of creative chaos. It will not be neat - it will be messy. It seems that those in the upper quadrant of the left cannot so easily handle creative chaos - and neither can those on the right. Ultimately they want Order.

But for those of us who value freedom (NOTE: I'm using shorthands here - as in the test there are level of degrees as the illustration shows) we can think creatively of how we might be able to call a cease fire as we try to find resolution. For us, it is not ordered structures but relationships built on trust that would hold us together through such a process. It's Jefferson and Adams banding together - and those two were so different, they spent most of their time fighting, but in the end they found peace and America is built on both their ideals. Thank God they didn't kill each other.

The structures of TEC are imploding and imposing more stringent attempts to maintain the semblance of order (new canons to discipline the laity, more lawsuits, more defrockings and inhibitions) does not solve the problem! The grip tightens which lessens freedom - freedom to be creative and to love and to have the audacity to risk failure. There can be no growth, spiritually or as a church, if we are not free to risk failure.

I maintain that for all the ConCom's protests - many of them are now finding themselves slipping under the horizontal axis. And what Rowan is realizing if our sources are correct is that those who are below the horizontal line on the left are not loyal to the institution. They are using the institution for their own political agenda and that's not lost on him, believe me. The events of this past month went too far. Or as Janis Joplin sang, freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose. I am not that far from the horizontal line to discard the importance of order and of institutions. I am not an anarchist. But the actions in London proved to be a form of ecclesiastical anarchy.

Again, where Graham Kings analogy breaks down is that it does not grasp that there are many in the Common Cause Partnership and Gafcon allies that desire order, but it's order based on a common vision of scripture and the trinity and the place of common worship. not on propping up old broken structures. The Church does not save us. That's a job for Jesus.

It is for freedom Christ came to set us free. He didn't bring us authoritarian order (though he could have - Judas and the other disciples expected it and He let them down), he brought us true freedom in Christ. I would maintain that the freedom we enjoy informs our reading of scripture - to read scripture is not to read it as an oppressive rule book of a Cranky God out to play Blue Meany to His people, but as the autobiography of God our Father, Son, and Holy Spirit and of His people. The scriptures are alive as He is alive and they breathe into us freedom, a freedom born in Jesus - it is a freedom to do good. It's one of the great paradoxes. "He that loses his life for My sake, finds it." That's not holding tightly, as we would when we crave order, but by letting go - which seems to be the last thing we think of to do these days. Let go.

Our nation was founded on a document that spelled out our freedom in the most vivid terms. It has since then gotten into our DNA. The Declaration of Independence was not about imposing authoritarian structures on the American colonies but about being set free from them - including the Church of England. We in Virginia used to remember that.

This is why many of us call what's happening to us in the Anglican Communion the "realignment." We have to think differently about ourselves, about our structures, about our relationships to one another, about smashing the silos and tearing down the walls. The Episcopal Church wishes to live in a Silo of their own making, while many of us - surprising allies perhaps - wish to tear those Silos down and be set free - not to be autonomous anarchists, but to be born again.

Tuesday Afternoon at the Cafe: It's all about Shakespeare



Time out from The Troubles. This is a full show, so order a couple of butterbeers and chai and consider this informative show on our favorite playwright. We are not exactly a big fan of Howard Bloom, in fact, in our Shakespeare classes at Georgetown we were forbidden to even utter the name Shakespeare in class, but as Bloom wrote a book about the playwright, the interview is fascinating, as are the interviews that follow. It's all about Shakespeare.

Archbishop of Canterbury and Archbishop of York issue joint statement on recent same sex wedding in Anglican Diocese of London

Rowan Williams and John Sentamu issue joint statement on same sex wedding officiated by an Church of England priest at St. Bartholomew the Great in London. From here.

Tuesday 17 June 2008

"We have heard the reports of the recent service in St Bartholomew the Great with very great concern. We cannot comment on the specific circumstances because they are the subject of an investigation launched by the Bishop of London.

On the general issue, however, the various reference points for the Church of England's approach to human sexuality (1987 Synod motion, 1991 Bishops' Statement- Issues in Human Sexuality- , Lambeth motion 1:10, House of Bishops' 2005 statement on civil partnerships) are well known and remain current.

Those clergy who disagree with the Church's teaching are at liberty to seek to persuade others within the Church of the reasons why they believe, in the light of Scripture, tradition and reason that it should be changed. But they are not at liberty simply to disregard it."

Or what?

Monday, June 16, 2008

At the turn of the tide ...



"All you have to decide
is what to do with the time
that is given to you."