In addition, the Primates decided to reject future financial assistance from the Episcopal Church. Archbishop Peter Akinola, Primate of Nigeria and chairman of CAPA said in a press conference, “We do not want any money from the Episcopal Church of the United States. This is not rhetoric. We will not, on the altar of money, mortgage our conscience, mortgage our faith, mortgage our salvation.” The Nigerian Church news service reported that the African Primates were committed to self reliance rather than depending on “liberal congregations in the West.”

We applaud the courageous decisions of these CAPA Primates who stand against the unbiblical actions of ECUSA in such an uncompromising fashion. We join with these Primates and once again call upon the Episcopal Church leadership to repent of their actions and return to the historic faith and practice of Anglicanism.

CAPA’s decision came in the wake of ECUSA spokesmen challenging the sincerity of African opposition. One unnamed source quoted in news accounts said, “These guys are grandstanding. They keep vilifying us but they keep seeking the benefits of an ongoing relationship. It a great gig – you get to look courageous without taking any sort of risk.” Not only is such an attitude insulting and demeaning, ECUSA leadership also clearly misjudged the integrity and resolve of African Anglicanism.

The response from revisionists and Episcopal Church leadership has been predictable but nevertheless appalling. The Rev. Ian Douglas, a professor at the Episcopal Divinity School, Cambridge, Massachusetts disdainfully suggests Archbishop Akinola does not realize the impact of his decision, noting 70% of CAPA’s operating budget comes from the US. “Archbishop Akinola feels passionate about not being beholden to the church in the West. For them to say ‘no’ to that money will cause severe financial constraints unless there are other sources ready to step into the gap." Mr. Douglas either cannot understand or will not acknowledge that the issue is not about independence for independence’s sake; nor is it an issue of not wanting to be “beholden.” News accounts say church leaders “doubt that the very poor African provinces would reject all US church funding.” Clearly saying “no” to money is incomprehensible to such individuals.

Patrick Mauney, head of Anglican Global Relations at 815 also dismisses the integrity of CAPA’s rejection of ECUSA funds. A recent article reports Mauney’s opinion that the decision was not a matter of conscience but rather engineered by what The Christian Science Monitor labels “dissenters within the US church who want to marginalize their existing leadership.” The magazine points to the American Anglican Council as the best example of “dissenters”. Why is it impossible for the ECUSA leadership to accept that Global South leaders speak and act for themselves based upon conviction? They would no more accept the role as “puppet” of conservatives in the West than they do of the liberal revisionists. On another note, how laughable to suggest that it is conservatives who seek to marginalize ECUSA leadership when AAC would never be offered the warm hand of inclusiveness by these same liberals.

”I suspect they're looking for a symbolic way to say we're unhappy,'' Mauney said of the African leaders. The patronizing, contemptuous tone of this remark is unconscionable. Perhaps Mr. Mauney simply cannot comprehend that one can be driven and directed by matters of conscience and truth and that the sacrifice of money is fare preferable to the sacrifice of spiritual and moral integrity.

We also call upon ECUSA “leaders” and “spokesmen” to refrain from degrading comments that smack of condescension and racism. The African leadership is committed to the teaching and practice of Biblical faith and historic Anglicanism. To categorize their views and actions in any other way is outrageous. We pray that ECUSA will repent not only of their actions but also their arrogance.

DEPO ENGAGED IN NEW HAMPSHIRE AND NEW JERSEY

Two churches have begun the formal process of Delegated Episcopal Pastoral Oversight (DEPO), the plan issued by the House of Bishops last month. Church of the Redeemer in Rochester, New Hampshire and St. Anthony’s in Hackensack, New Jersey have written to their bishops outlining issues with their diocesan leadership and their specific needs and requirements for oversight. Both churches point to ECUSA’s departure from historic faith and order and request immediate care and oversight from another bishop. While the specific requests vary slightly, both churches address oversight, redirection of funds and pastoral succession in the congregation. Both churches stress that lay leadership was the driving force behind seeking DEPO.

V. Gene Robinson has met with Church of the Redeemer and said he is open to another bishop’s visiting that church, but he has not yet responded to their request in writing nor provided a list of possible bishops as he pledged to do. Bishop Croneberger of New Jersey has not yet formally responded to St. Anthony’s nor scheduled a meeting.

We have expressed ongoing concern about the feasibility of DEPO as it does not provide for those most in need of adequate oversight. As we have consistently emphasized, the terminology “adequate oversight” must be defined by those who seek it. As more and more churches engage DEPO, we will be carefully assessing diocesan responses. If the expressed needs of the congregations who are in revisionist dioceses are not met, further action will be inevitable.

JEFFERY JOHN APPOINTED DEAN OF ST. ALBANS IN UK

Canon Jeffrey John was appointed this week as Dean of St. Albans, senior post in the Church of England. John was appointed Bishop of Reading last July but faced a storm of protest from conservative Anglicans both domestically and globally and withdrew his acceptance after meeting with the Archbishop of Canterbury. This appointment is also controversial, especially in light of his open support of same sex unions. While he has pledged not to disobey current church policy, his new position elevates his forum and potential to influence change of that policy.

Evangelicals in St. Albans have expressed “dismay” at the appointment and predict deeper divisions. Orthodox clergy have scheduled a meeting next week to plan their response. The Church of England Newspaper reported that “some of the biggest churches in the diocese could move to withhold their quota, and a significant number are talking about barring the bishop from taking confirmation services.”

Spokesmen for The Lesbian and Gay Christian Movement were delighted with the appointment, calling it “a well aimed kick in the teeth for those Lambeth flunkies who so badly misread the mind of the middle of the road English Anglican.” This group is reportedly pressuring John to push for approval of same sex blessings. The Guardian, a liberal publication in England, referred to the appointment as a “consolation” prize for the loss of the bishopric last year.

Criticism of the appointment is multifaceted and complex. While some on both sides of the sexuality issue claim a distinction between the appropriateness of serving as dean and bishop, an editorial in The Guardian calls such distinction “hypocrisy” and the appointment illogical. John, an avowed homosexual who has lived with another Anglican clergyman for 27 years, insists their relationship has been chaste for a long period and therefore he is fulfilling the guidelines of the Church of England regarding sexuality. Many find this claim difficult to accept, and others suggest that living in a “committed, loving” albeit non-sexual relationship does not reflect Biblical moral teaching.

Critics also raise the issue of the timing of this appointment, finding it problematic and provocative given the admonition to Anglican provinces to refrain from controversial actions until the Lambeth Commission completes its work. The fact that Prime Minister Tony Blair personally sanctioned John’s appointment raises another concern. News reports describe Blair as “dismayed by church infighting over homosexual clergy”. The Guardian wrote that Blair’s decision is “part of a Downing Street campaign to warn Anglican leaders that a person’s sexuality should not bar them from senior positions.”

Reaction to Blair’s involvement is controversial in and of itself. A spokesman for The Lesbian and Gay Christian Movement remarked, “This is Number 10 saying the way the Church treated Jeffrey John over the Reading affair is poor.” The Rev. David Philips, Director of the Church Society, presents an opposing view, accusing the Prime Minister of “deliberately stirring things up.”

We are concerned with the message and goal of the British government. It certainly appears that pressure is being directed toward the Lambeth Commission, and this begs the question: Does the Prime Minister and his government care if the Anglican Communion disintegrates?

V. GENE ROBINSON DECLARES “NEW ERA”

To date we have never agreed with V. Gene Robinson on the issue of human sexuality, but he made a comment yesterday with which we wholeheartedly concur. In remarks made April 22, 2004, Robinson said, “And it’s too late to put the toothpaste back in the tube.” He’s right. We cannot deny the disastrous results of General Convention 2003 upon the unity of the Anglican Communion. We cannot pretend that all is well. We cannot ignore that ECUSA has abandoned 2000 years of Christian moral teaching as well as Anglican tradition. We cannot get that “toothpaste back in the tube.” Nor can we put Humpty Dumpty together again. Last year ECUSA succeeded in “tearing the fabric of the Anglican Communion,” and if left unaddressed, Minneapolis 2003 is only the beginning.

The headline of the report in The Broadcaster reads, “Gay N.H. Bishop Riding Crest of Liberation Wave.” In Robinson’s words, “We are on the crest of a new era”. The article also says “Robison offered other gay clergy to symbolically stand on his shoulders to further ‘seismic change’ within the church.” During the days immediately following his election and those preceding his conformation and consecration, Robinson insisted his being a bishop had nothing to do with sexuality. Now we see a homosexual activist agenda emerge as a high priority. He has been liberated and now he is passionately committed to liberating others, a task referred to as a “Journey of Inclusion”.

A few months ago, Bishop Ingham of Canada said in an interview that the next battle will move beyond sexuality to focus on the “exclusivity of Christianity” and the need to recognize Jesus as a way, but not the only way. Yes, indeed it is too late to put the toothpaste back in the tube in North America. Our only hope lies in those in the Anglican Communion who have pledged to stand with those “dissenting minorities” who are committed to Biblical authority and historic Anglican faith and order. We are in a “new era” and face greater “seismic change unless we “repent and return to the Lord.” May the Lord have mercy upon us.

Cynthia P. Brust
Director of Communications
American Anglican Council
1110 Vermont Ave., NW
Suite 1100
Washington, DC 20005
202-296-5360
202-296-5361 FAX
cbrust@americananglican.org
Visit us at http://www.americananglican.org