1) http://www.virtuosityonline.org/portal/modules/news/article.php?storyid=1070
Date:    Mon, 19 Jul 2004 21:09:55 -0400
From:    David Virtue 
Subject: Virtuosity Viewpoints - July 20, 2004
(…)IN THE DIOCESE OF NEW WESTMINSTER, Bishop Michael Ingham has served 'eviction notices' 
to two priests opposed to same-sex blessings. Both priests chose in March to leave the 
Anglican Church of Canada because they oppose same-sex blessings, but continue to operate 
out of churches the diocese considers to be its property. Rev. Ed Hird of St. Simon's Church 
in Deep Cove and Rev. Barclay Mayo of Christ the Redeemer in Pender Harbour were "invited" 
in letters from Bishop Michael Ingham to "seek out alternate worship space for those whom 
[they] lead." "Essentially, it says, 'Get out or we'll throw you out,' " Rev. Hird said. 
He said the members of St. Simon's hold the deed and title to the property. But George Cadman, 
chief legal officer of the diocese, said a parish cannot legally leave the Anglican Church(…)

2) http://www.fotf.ca/familyfacts/tfn/2004/072704.html
Focus on the Family Canada, Family Facts News, July 27th 2004 CLOUT OF "GLOBAL SOUTH" 
CHRISTIANS CANNOT BE IGNORED Although mainstream Christianity in the Global South - Asia, 
Africa and Latin America - has long been dominated by the churches of Europe and North America, 
that relationship is changing, Knight Ridder/Tribune reported last week(…) Yet the division 
within Anglicanism is not solely geographic in nature. In Canada and the US, growing numbers 
of conservatives are forsaking their national churches and accepting the invitations of the 
Anglican Primates or leaders of the Global South to come under their pastoral authority. 
In Canada, this has led to the creation of the Anglican Communion in Canada (ACiC), a small but 
growing group of priests and churches, mostly in BC, that no longer recognizes the authority 
of the Anglican Church of Canada. Instead, the ACiC is formally aligned with the Anglican Province 
of Rwanda. 
"The final nail in the coffin" for these disaffected Anglicans, says ACiC spokesman Rev. Paul 
Carter, was the decision of the church's general synod in May to approve a statement that 
"affirms the integrity and sanctity of committed adult same-sex relationships." Just a day 
earlier, delegates had voted to suspend any decision on approving a marriage-like rite of 
blessing for committed same-sex couples until 2007. "The Anglican Church of Canada and its 
revisionist agenda is not satisfying a number of people, and they are feeling increasingly 
disgruntled about that," Carter told TFN. "People . . . just sense deep in their spirit that 
something's not right."

3a) http://www.virtuosityonline.org/portal/modules/news/article.php?storyid=1108

NEWS : CHURCH OF ENGLAND EVANGELICAL COUNCIL SUBMISSION TO LAMBETH COMMISSION Posted by dvirtue 
on 2004/7/29 14:09:13 
Submission to the Lambeth Commission from 
The Church of England Evangelical Council (CEEC)
7/29/2004

The Church of England Evangelical Council is the democratically constituted voice of Evangelical 
Anglicanism in England, which last autumn held a major National Evangelical Anglican Congress. 
CEEC is also part of the Evangelical Fellowship of the Anglican Communion and EFAC's conference 
in Kenya last summer made a lengthy statement on the issue before the Commission. Bishops from 
around the world were present at both conferences. This submission, then, has active knowledge 
of the thinking of national and international Anglican Evangelicalism behind it. 


1. Our understanding is that this submission should be brief and focussed, and it thus runs the 
risk of appearing trite, uninformed or uncaring. In particular, we have not rehearsed our position 
on biblical interpretation, nor of appropriate pastoral guidelines for local congregations. 
If the Commission sees fit, we would happily expand our arguments.

2. The current crisis has been provoked particularly by the election and consecration of 
Gene Robinson to the Diocese of New Hampshire, but it is not limited to that. We have in mind 
the actions of the Diocese of New Westminster, and the decision of the General Synod of the 
Anglican Church of Canada to "affirm the integrity and sanctity of committed adult same sex 
relationships." We also most recently have in mind the extraordinary appointment of the 
Reverend Canon Jeffrey John as Dean of St. Albans. In our own country this highlights the 
particular concerns because it was made in direct opposition to the Archbishop's request that 
no controversial appointments be made until the Commission has reported. It becomes another 
clear example of provocation by a liberal and revisionist elite on an orthodox and unsuspecting 
Church. It raises the problem of how the solution the Commission arrives at ought to be workable 
at a Diocesan as well as a Provincial level. Thus every reference to ECUSA and a Province below 
could and should be read as having relevance to other referents, albeit outside the strict terms 
of the Commission.

3. In itself this restricts the options open to the Commission, for the issue is not merely 
Gene Robinson, and will not be resolved by his resignation, or the declaration of his election 
or consecration as invalid. Whatever the merits of those actions in that case (and while the first 
is simply improbable, the last two are open to substantial legal challenge), they only provide 
a temporary solution to one aspect of the crisis. The consecration of Gene Robinson is likely 
to be a precedent, as the crisis in Oxford Diocese last summer showed. 

4. We want the Commission to note, first, that the seriousness of this debate should not be 
underestimated. We are aware that for both sides the issue is salvation, and that the two 
understandings of the meaning of salvation are incompatible and mutually exclusive. Our concern 
on this issue is therefore not fundamentally ecclesiological, sacramental, doctrinal, nor biblical, 
(critical though all those issues are) but pastoral, for in classic Christian teaching, homosexual 
actions leave the actors facing God's judgement without Christ's mediating work. Teaching which 
encourages such behaviour is profoundly cruel, as it encourages people to sin and, in defiance of 
the gospel, to call that sin an act of grace. Toleration of such teaching is equally cruel, and 
makes one complicit in the sins of both the actor and the teacher. This issue matters to us because 
people matter to us, and both heaven and hell are genuine alternative destinies.

5. A note on questions of Jurisdiction

5.1 Our starting-point is that the Provinces of the Anglican Communion are part of the one universal 
apostolic Church whose head is Jesus Christ, and that accordingly neither the Communion as a whole 
nor any Province within it has any power or jurisdiction either to ordain or to permit anything 
contrary to the will of God.

5.2 This entails that any rules, laws or practices amongst the Communion or by its constituent 
Provinces must be in accordance with the will of God expressed in Holy Scripture. 

5.3 As part of the apostolic Church, ECUSA has no jurisdiction or power to institute the practices 
it has, for God has forbidden this throughout Scripture.

5.4 As part of the apostolic Church, the rest of the Communion not only has no jurisdiction or 
power to permit these practices, but rather has a positive duty to discipline ECUSA for the purpose 
of restoring it to a loving obedience her head.

5.5 Some deny that explicit legal instruments exist amongst the members of the Communion to regulate 
the exercise of this disciplinary jurisdiction. However, this must be challenged. First, a formal 
jurisdiction is necessarily implicit in the position given to Holy Scripture by the Lambeth Quadrilateral, 
even if it is not legally expressed. Further, any legal instruments of the separate Provinces of 
the Communion are subordinate only, designed to further our common life to the glory of God. They 
must therefore be set against the background primarily of Holy Scripture and secondly of the 
traditions of the Church on earth. 

5.6 Such legal instruments as exist are thus a partial expression of a wider range of formal 
instruments, such as invitations to the Lambeth Conference, and those are in turn an expression 
of the authority and duty of the Church to govern itself under God's authority.

5.7 Holy Scripture and the tradition of the Church on earth alike testify to a residual jurisdiction 
to discipline those in error even without any explicit subordinate legal mechanism. In the case of 
Holy Scripture, St. Paul both rebukes his fellow apostle, and also corrects churches of which he is
no longer a member. In the case of the tradition of the Church on earth, discipline has been 
consistently exercised even against erring bishops by those outside their sees. This is evidenced 
in Cyprian's Letter 67. Cyprian is frequently cited as upholding Diocesan or Provincial autonomy, 
but there he and others subordinate that consideration to the need for a wider discipline. 

5.8 This residual jurisdiction cannot be revoked by desuetude, for the Church has no authority to 
revoke it at all. Nor can it be repudiated by the Provinces of the Communion without an implicit 
repudiation of their apostolic inheritance. If the objection that there are no secondary legal 
mechanisms for the exercise of this jurisdiction be accepted, this only entails that a range of 
mechanisms be forthwith be created for the purpose of the proper pastoral care of ECUSA by discipline. 
These may or may not include legal mechanisms.

5.9 The objection that this amounts to retrospective legislation is fallacious since the Scriptural 
prohibition on homosexual genital practice is clear and express, as is the historical submission 
of Christ's church on earth to this injunction. Similarly the existence of both Scriptural and 
traditional residual jurisdictions for the exercise of discipline is well-attested. Both 
substantive law and residual jurisdiction are therefore not being retrospectively created. 
ECUSA can only claim to have been either ignorant of these things, or to have disregarded them. 
Neither ignorance nor disregard abolish either law or jurisdiction, but go only to challenge 
ECUSA's claim to be authentically part of the Communion.

Unworkable solutions

6. Following from point 4, those churches that have broken or suspended communion with ECUSA are 
therefore simply insisting on the maintenance of Biblical standards of discipline that they would 
apply equally to any individual within their dioceses, or to any church seeking communion with them. 
This is done for the eternal security of the individuals concerned.

7. We submit that tensions on this subject are running so strong internationally that either ECUSA 
will split further, or the Communion will split entire. Indeed we can see no alternative to that 
choice, and foresee that any solution which fails to take the seriousness of the charge made against 
ECUSA with full force, will be anything other than temporary.

8. Furthermore, we question any model which seeks to resolve the problem of two Provinces being in 
impaired or non-Communion by means of seeing them as only being indirectly related via their primary 
Communion with the Archbishop of Canterbury. It would be appealing, but the logic of the orthodox 
means it will fail. They will be out of Communion with anyone who is in Communion with Gene Robinson, 
and that must include the Archbishop of Canterbury himself if the logic of Communion is followed. 
The only route out of that dilemma is for the Archbishop to declare himself in at least impaired 
Communion with ECUSA.

9. We are in frequent contact with a range of traditionalists in ECUSA, and they report considerable 
irritation with the rhetorical technique of being provided with a form of words to which a number of 
(mutually
contradictory) meanings can be given or where loopholes can be found. The Commission must take pains 
to express itself unambiguously if it is to win the traditionalists' confidence. This is not a case 
where a quasi-balanced attempt to hold everyone together will succeed

10. The rhetoric of liberalisation needs careful unpacking as well, for too often it implies that 
the traditionalist case is of its essence thoughtless and unreflective, a product of naïve and 
inadequate theological depth. A good example here is the comments made by the Bishop of St Alban's 
in his Presidential address to his Diocesan Synod, 12th June 2004. Commenting on the response to 
the appointment of Jeffrey John he said, "One of the saddening features of my postbag, over the past 
few weeks, has been the way in which biblical texts have been used. It is not that they are quoted 
- that is not the issue - but it is as though all the thinking and study that has gone on in the 
Church during the twentieth century concerning the Bible has simply not been recognised". Granted 
that there are thoughtless and unreflective people on all sides of this argument, and we cannot 
comment on the Bishop's postbag, it is matter of record that at its best, the traditionalist case 
has been made, on numerous occasions, with considerable academic rigour and theological sophistication. 

11. Similarly, traditionalists in ECUSA - and we - are familiar with committees which claim a 
theologically neutral (or theologically
superior) stance from which it can see that both sides are equally at fault. We strongly repudiate 
that this double and equivalent fault is the case, and deny the claimed theological superiority that sees it.

12. Evidence of that technique already being in place is the equivalence being placed on (alleged) 
toleration of polygamy in some African Provinces, and homosexual expression in (some) Western Provinces. 
We urge the Commission to study the Constitutions of those African Provinces with great care before 
such toleration of polygamy is assumed or described. The Anglican Church of Kenya, for instance, 
has a lengthy description of the disciplinary procedures to be followed for a polygamist, and they 
are deeply offended to see their pastorally nuanced discipline wrongly described as toleration.

13. This is itself evidence of the continued bureaucratic domination in the Communion by the white 
West and North, despite the numerical domination of the global South. So high are feelings running 
over this, that we fear many think that if the Communion will not adhere to orthodoxy, and 
discipline members in line with its stated position, then its raison d'être has ceased beyond 
being a remnant of the British Empire, and will be sloughed off with as little concern.

14. We also suggest that the technique of dealing with the two views as equivalents, imparts a 
spurious equality between two views which are disparate in the strength of their claims to tradition, 
catholicity, unity, and Scriptural interpretation. The novelty and self-consciously communion-breaking 
nature of the consecration of Gene Robinson must be recorded, as must its distortion of the 
Lambeth Quadrilateral in pitting one element, episcopacy, against the others. We note the disdain 
with which the Diocese of New Westminster treated the Primates' Statement. Equally, the Bishop 
of St Alban's has shown similar contempt for the Archbishop of Canterbury's call for calm. It is 
breathtaking that the Bishop can make this appointment and simultaneously expect those who oppose 
it to submit to his Episcopal authority as a mark of authentic Anglicanism.

15. In that some people have manipulated rightful authority to their own ends, and are enforcing 
those ends on others, the consecration of Gene Robinson was also an abuse of power, albeit under
 a democratic form, and therefore an act of ecclesiastical tyranny. By the same token, however, 
the refusal to offer adequate oversight for orthodox Christians thus marginalized is equally an 
abuse of power by the non-exercising of rightful authority.

16. The matter of justifiable Scriptural interpretation is especially critical at this point, 
because, as the recent report Some Issues in Human Sexuality from the English House of Bishops 
notes, and notwithstanding the few caveats the Report itself lists, 'the consensus of biblical 
scholarship still points us in the direction of the traditional reading of the biblical material' (4.4.71). 

17. There is therefore no parallel with the debate over women's ordination where there are 
significant texts which can be used by both sides. The liberalizing case has consistently been 
judged a misinterpretation, by General Synod, the Lambeth Conference and the Primates' meting 
in Brazil, to name but three. Therefore the means to resolve, or at least to live with the tensions 
caused by, women's ordination cannot be used to solve our crisis. We therefore reject any model 
based on a process of reception, development, emergence, or of the provision of a Second Province, 
and the Commission should think beyond such suggestions.

18. For all that the traditionalist case has been on occasion overstated, misstated, or expressed 
unlovingly or untheologically, such should not be confused with the case in itself, nor have such 
occasions been the normal or desired self-expression of the case. We ask the Commission to avoid 
caricaturing both sides by their worst expressions (or by the other side's caricatures), but 
instead deal with them in their most consistent and authentic forms. This will inevitably mean 
that the traditionalist case is described as the overwhelmingly majority voice of Anglicanism, 
past and present, and indeed the overwhelmingly majority voice of Christianity, past and present. 
We do not discern the need for a new Word from God on this subject, as we do not find any theological 
confusion or pastoral inadequacy in the scriptural provision.

19. Finally, we submit that a proposal based on the loosening of provincial ties and giving greater 
autonomy will not work. It is necessary to recognize the theological and ecclesial maturity of 
churches across the communion, and that they are no longer client states, but the problem is too 
complex for that alone to be adequate. On one level, it is simply the issue of one Province or 
Diocese flouting of the mind of the Communion, but it is simultaneously the question of the 
responsibility of the wider Communion for those within that Province or Diocese who repudiate that flouting. 

Proposal

20. Our suggestion is that there be a reversible suspension of representatives of ECUSA from 
being invited to the Lambeth Conference, the Primates meeting, ACC or indeed any event where the 
Archbishop of Canterbury is acting in the chair. A clear exception should be made for all those 
who have publicly distanced themselves from the consecration of Gene Robinson, and who can rightly 
claim to be in communion with the majority mind of the most recent Lambeth Conference.

21. At the same moment, there should be provision of sanctioned oversight for the marginalised 
orthodox, and it is necessary that such oversight should be provided without the primates feeling 
the necessity of obtaining the permission of the Province or Diocese in question. This action is 
legitimate precisely because the abuse of power that has led to this crisis is illegitimate, and 
Provincial or Diocesan consent is unnecessary, and to a great extent undesirable, because it 
serves to legitimate the abusers. 

22. These sanctions should come from the Primates' meeting rather than residing in the office or 
person of the Archbishop, since mutual discipline is a collegial matter. 

23. The Primates who meet to enact this should simultaneously discuss whether there are other 
Provinces or Dioceses where such oversight must also be needed, with particular reference to ACC, 
the Diocese of New Westminster and the Diocese of St Alban's. 

24. The essentially reversible nature of this is a reflection of the theology of the discipline 
exercised in 2 Corinthians, where the final goal is neither marginalisation nor exclusion but 
reconciliation. The proximate means to full reconciliation, however, is neither dialogue nor 
creative tension but reversible expulsion. This is consistent with Paul's expressed goal of 
love (2 Cor 2:8) and avoids the divisive consequences either of disobediently refusing to confront 
error or of denying the salvific and reconciling goal of discipline.

© The Church of England Evangelical Council 2004

3b) http://www.thinkinganglicans.org.uk/ss/archives/000754.html
http://www.reform.org.uk
Tuesday, 27 July 2004
Reform paper in full

The full text of the paper published by Reform today and referenced in the adjacent news item can be found 
below the fold. REFORM Ways Forward in the Present Crisis for the Church of England " … we have reached a 
crucial and critical point in the life of the Anglican Communion." (Statement from Anglican Primates, 
16th October2003)

The crisis that is upon us has been precipitated by some Episcopal churches in the USA and Canada 
approving certain same-sex relationships. However, that crisis is not simply about the consequences 
for the wider Anglican Communion. It has also brought to a head a crisis within our own Church of 
England. Although the Church of England has not itself yet taken any formal steps towards the 
approval of relationships involving same-sex intercourse, and while a number of bishops have 
courageously spoken out against such developments, it is clear that a significant number of our 
church leaders - both bishops and clergy - promote an outlook which is not substantially different 
from the one held by those who have provoked the present crisis in the USA and Canada. We believe 
this has happened because there has been a move away from trusting the authority and sufficiency 
of the Bible, and towards accommodating secular ideas of credal diversity; and also because both 
bishops and clergy have failed to "drive away" false doctrine(…) 11. Adequate Episcopal Oversight 
As impaired communion can only be temporary, what is now being called in the Anglican Communion 
'Adequate Episcopal Oversight' will, therefore, be sought during the absence of spiritual oversight. 
There will be appeals to bishops elsewhere in the Communion who, like the 13 Primates from the 
Global South, are willing to take a stand. 'Impaired communion' presents particular challenges for 
churches when it comes to proposing candidates for training to the ordained ministry and then 
subsequently placing them in title posts. This brings us to an important proposal: the establishment 
of a panel of reference. 12. Establishing a Panel of Reference for recognition of ministry within 
the wider church Where a parish is in impaired communion with a Diocesan bishop, many of the normal 
diocesan legal and administrative arrangements will temporarily have to continue. However, when a 
parish in impaired communion wishes to put forward a candidate for training for the ordained ministry 
or to have a curate, new arrangements will be required. There will be difficulties in not being 
able to turn to the Diocesan bishop. We therefore propose the establishment of a panel of reference. 
Potential candidates could then be referred to this panel to evaluate their suitability for training. 
At the end of the training, the panel can advise those bishops willing to provide alternative oversight, 
on a candidate's suitability for ordination. We see a panel of reference as providing an essential 
form of accountability within the wider orthodox church in relation to the discernment of ministry, 
albeit on a temporary basis until the present doctrinal confusion is resolved. It will provide a 
degree of confidence that parishes and individuals are not taking advantage of the unusual situation 
of impaired communion to promote the personal interests of individuals who may be unsuitable for 
ordination while at the same time encouraging necessary action. 13. Implications for Reform After 
a period of reflection and consultation which we believe demonstrates both a steadiness of purpose 
and a commitment to address the present crisis ,we now intend to present these matters to the
 National Conference where they can be discussed. Issues relating to impairment of communion and 
the establishing of a panel of reference can be considered as we seek to discern God's will for the 
future. July 2004

3c) http://www.churchnewspaper.com/?go=news&read=on&number_key=5727&title=Evangelicals%20urge%20Primates
%20to%20challenge%20bishop's%20power
Evangelicals urge Primates to challenge bishop's power      
Church of England Newspaper, UK No. 5727     Date: July 23, 2004

Evangelical leaders have stepped up their opposition to the promotion of Jeffrey John to be Dean by 
calling for action to be taken against the Bishop of St Albans.

They visited Downing Street last week to convey to the Prime Minister their concern over the appointment, 
which they said has led to splits within the diocese(…)

It condemns the consecration of Gene Robinson as "an abuse of power and an act of ecclesiastical tyranny".

3d) http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/07/27/nbul27.xml&sSheet=/news/2004/07/27/ixhome.html
Telegraph.co.uk - London,England,UK  July 26th 2004
Parishes urged to test bishops on gay beliefs
Church of England evangelicals intensified their battle over homosexuality yesterday by calling on 
hundreds of parishes to reject the spiritual authority of liberal bishops. Reform, the conservative 
evangelical network, announced plans for a national campaign in the statement to its 1,700 members(…)

4) http://nikkei-holycross.com/ http://www.acinw.org/articles/eleventh%20anglican.html
"Setting Love In Order"
A conference that teaches
how to find the cure
for our souls that
sets love in order
PRESENTED BY REV. MARIO BERGNER
OF REDEEMED LIVES MINISTRIES
Redeemed Lives Ministries is a ministry of pastoral care and discipleship for the cure and maturation 
of the soul. Our mission is to bring people into the saving and healing embrace of Jesus Christ. 
September 17 and 18, 2004 SPONSORS Holy Cross Japanese-Canadian Anglican Church 4580 Walden St. 
Vancouver, BC V5V 3S5
Phone: 604-879-1344 Fax: 604-879-1212

Holy Cross, Abbotsford
Anglican Church
P. O. Box 102, Abbotsford, BC V2S 4N9
Phone: 604-853-6083

Location:
19533 - 64th Avenue, Langley
(Christ for the Nations)
Setting Love in Order is a conference to help you understand the power and meaning of real love in 
your relationships with others. The love of God is a primary message of the Bible and the church. 
Rev. Bergner will teach on how a clear knowledge and experience of love has an important impact on 
your life in the context of a meaningful relationship with God and others.

"… powerful truth still broke through to me: all people bear wounds from broken relationships, but 
these relationships can be healed through the Cross of Jesus." Rev. Mario Bergner is the founder 
and director of Redeemed Lives Ministries, a ministry of pastoral care and discipleship located 
in Wheaton, Illinois. He is an Anglican Priest serving under the leadership of the 
Right Reverend Keith Ackerman of the Episcopal Diocese of Quincy in central Illinois and has 
been a longtime associate of Leanne Payne.

Mario, who graduated from Trinity with a Master of Divinity degree in 1994, has been a teacher 
and a pastoral care giver for twenty years. He has served on the drama faculties of Boston University, 
Wright State University, Carnegie-Mellon University and currently teaches at Roosevelt University 
in Chicago. _ Registration for Setting Love in Order should be received by September 1st to ensure a 
place, as seating is limited. Meals will not be provided but bag lunches can be brought and many 
local restaurants are within easy access. Please mail your registration to: Church of the 
Holy Cross, P.O. Box 102, Abbotsford, BC V2S 4N9 Fax to 604-879-1212 or for more info or email 
registration please send
to:
SetLoveInOrder@hotmail.com
NAME CHURCH
ADDRESS
CITY POSTAL CODE
PHONE EMAIL
The cost for this conference is $35CDN per person or $60CDN per couple. Please forward a cheque for 
the total amount to the address below. Accomodation is available at the following local hotels: 
Best Western 5978 Glover Road ph 1-888-530-9311 (dble @ $89/night) Hampton Inn 19500 Langley By-pass 
ph 604-530-6545 (dble @ $99/night) Sleep Inn 6722 Glover Road ph 604-514-3111 (sgl @ $69/night) 
Holiday Inn 8750 204th Street ph 604-882-2000 (dble @ $115/night)

5) http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.asp?Page=/Culture/archive/200407/CUL20040722c.html
House Votes to Support Traditional Marriage
By David Thibault
CNSNews.com Managing Editor
July 22, 2004
(CNSNews.com) - U.S. House members Thursday voted to strengthen a law that defines marriage as an 
act between one man and one woman. By a vote of 233 to 194, the House action is also seen as a defeat 
for homosexual activists seeking to export the legal rights of marriage from one state to another(…)