Archbishop of Canterbury's Lack of Leadership Puts the Anglican Communion at Risk of Coming Apart

It appears to me that the Archbishop of Canterbury's flip flopping on issues of human sexuality and his choosing sides in the Anglican conflict may lead to total destruction of the Anglican Communion as we know it. Instead of being a leader and staying in the middle and being fair on both sides, he chose to side with the global south and the ilk of Archbishop Peter Akinola of Nigeria. Archbishop Rowan Williams created this mess and now he is faced with the consequences. The American Church cannot possibly do the things requested by the meeting of the primates in Tanzania. We're a democracy. The House of Bishops, House of Deputies and the Executive Council reaches decisions by voting. And besides, our Annual meeting isn't until 2009. ----------------------------------------- Subject: Archbishop losses favor on all fronts Date: Fri, 23 Mar 2007 15:59:13 -0400 The Daily Telegraph Leader March 23, 2007 Communion no more: The Archbishop of Canterbury's plan to save the Anglican Communion lies in near ruins. The American bishops have rejected Dr Rowan William's scheme - endorsed by Anglican primates in Tanzania last month - to create a traditionalist enclave for conservatives opposed to liberal bishops. And they have set out their opinions in stinging language: not only is the Archbishop accused of promoting a 'spiritually unsound' project, but it is also implied that he is behaving like a British colonialist. The text of the American bishops' statement is damaging. This is a national Church speaking with an (almost) united voice. The casus belli has shifted from the ordination of Gene Robinson, to allegations of bullying by a group of primates led by the Archbishop of Canterbury. Dr Williams now finds himself out of favour with liberals and moderate conservatives in his own Communion. And, harsh though it may sound, he has only himself to blame. In the past couple of years, he has allowed conservative Anglicanism to be hijacked by extremists. Archbishop Peter Akinola, Anglican Primate of Nigeria, is the leader of the Global South provinces opposed to the ordination of actively homosexual clergy. That is fair enough, but he has also defended new Nigerian legislation that makes 'cancerous' (his word) same-sex activity punishable by up to five years' imprisonment. The deeply divisive figure of Archbishop Akinola was central to Dr Williams's Tanzanian compromise; is it any wonder that it has been rejected? The Archbishop's attempts to hold together the Communion have led him to a theological position so convoluted that he now has few natural supporters. He will find himself exposed at next year's Lambeth Conference - if, that is, it can take place at all without the support of the American Church.

ALZHEIMER'S SENATE BILLS & MY OWN BATTLE WITH THE DISEASE

Last night I was watching the Senate Committee on Aging, /Alzheimer's Sub Group hearings on C-Span. I learned that the number of Alzheimer's cases has doubled since 1990 and continues to rise.

Elsewhere on my blog I posted about some of the research going on here in Florida. Supporting this research is important. What I like about Senate Bills 897 and 898 is that is the result of research from real life situations and real life research accomplishments. The financial and emotional tolls on families are devastating. Long term care assistance is provided for in this legislation as well as an increase in the funding for research. There are several promising drugs getting closer to market.

Please consider writing to your senators asking that they support Senate Bills 897 and 898.

As far as my own disease process goes, I have periods of zipping along through life just fine, not forgetting words or task needing to be done and other times when I feel perplexed. In Washington, DC last week, I did well until my very last day.

I spent my last day in DC at Washington National Cathedral because I wanted to see the interment site of Helen Keller and Ann Sullivan and to do some shopping in the bookstore.

I had a wonderful afternoon sometimes sitting in one of the chapels, chatting with a tour guide and sitting on a bench and drinking coffee in one of the gardens. To me, there are two Taj Mahals of Anglicanism: Canterbury Cathedral and our National Cathedral. Both always leave me in awe. The deep spirituality of both cathedrals is something I feel when I 'm in those places.

Anyway, it was time to get back to my hotel to claim my luggage and get to the airport. So I headed down Massachusetts Ave and caught a cab to Starbucks near my hotel for a cappuccino. Starbucks is two blocks from my hotel. Never the less, I managed to get totally lost which had not happened before during my stay. I walked and walked and nothing was familiar.

I ended up at DuPont Circle, saw Starbucks and walked in to see if the familiar face of the person who served my coffee would indeed assure me that I was in the Starbucks I had been to earlier. I was lucky. The lady who served me was behind the counter and she pointed to the street along the side of Starbucks. All I had to do was walk the way she pointed down that street.

I thought about this experience while watching Senator Mikulski talking about her dad's Alzheimer's and my own parent's who both had Alzheimer's getting lost on a drive in South Florida.

The whole thing is scary, but I remain positive that a cure or way of managing the disease will come in the not too distant future. And I also hope that my disease takes a similar course of my dad's. He kept his humor, still drove, still enjoyed his ministry of visiting folks in a local nursing home and enjoyed life to the fullest. He passed away in peace from a heart attack with his family with him. My dad had class and dignity to the end. For that I am grateful and only hope I can be so lucky.

Please visit the Alzheimer's Association Website

http://www.alz.org

Senator Mikulski Introduces Comprehensive Alzheimer's Breakthrough Legislation

Senator Mikulski continued her fight for Alzheimer’s patients and caregivers by introducing two critical bills this month – The Alzheimer’s Breakthrough Act of 2007 (S. 898) and The Family Assistance Act of 2007 (S. 897).

The Alzheimer’s Breakthrough Act of 2007 doubles funding for Alzheimer’s research at the National Institutes of Health (NIH), giving researchers the resources they need to make breakthroughs that are on the horizon in diagnosis, prevention and intervention.

The Family Assistance Act of 2007 creates a $3,000 tax credit for families caring for a loved one with a chronic condition like Alzheimer’s to help them pay for prescription drugs, home health care and special day care. "I’m on the side of people with Alzheimer’s and the families who love and care for them.

Research that is going on right now is the master key that will one day open doors to finding a cure for Alzheimer’s," said Senator Mikulski. "Ninety-five percent of what we know about Alzheimer’s disease, we’ve learned in the past 15 years. We must stay the course and continue the investment. We need to do more and we need to do better."

As Chairman of the Retirement Security and Aging Subcommittee of the Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee, this month Senator Mikulski also convened the subcommittee's first hearing of the 110th Congress, and examined the need for a continued investment of federal resources in Alzheimer’s research and programs.

For more information, go to: http://mikulski.senate.gov/record.cfm?id=270936.

TEC House of Bishop's to The Anglican Communion: Take A Hike

Well, the New York Times gave a pretty good summary of TEC'S House Of Bishops Meeting at Camp Allen (Navasota, TX, not too far from Houston).

I am very happy about the outcome of their meeting. TEC does not appear to be backing down and if The Episcopal Church gets thrown out of the Anglican communion, so be it. The million dollars a year we spend for membership in that club can certainly be put to good use around the world.

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

Episcopals Rebuff Demands on Stance on Gays By LAURIE GOODSTEIN Published: March 21, 2007

Responding to an ultimatum from the leaders of the worldwide Anglican Communion, bishops of the Episcopal Church have rejected a key demand to create a parallel leadership structure to serve the conservative minority of Episcopalians who oppose their church’s liberal stand on homosexuality. The bishops, meeting at a retreat center outside of Houston, said they were aware that their decision could lead to the exclusion of the Episcopal Church from the Anglican Communion, an international confederation of churches tied to the Church of England.

Read More Here: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/21/us/21cndepiscopal.htmlex=1175140800&en=618a5080a1c6544c&ei=5070&emc=eta1

ANSWER END THE WAR IN IRAQ RALLLY AT THE PENTAGON

South Carolina Friends, Tim and Terry

I found myself at the Episcopal Peace Fellowship brunch sitting with a group of really nice folks. Among them were Tim and Terry. The three of us left together after the brunch to go down to the staging area for the march across the bridge to the Pentagon. It was SO cold and windy. I had my thermal underwear on and wool socks. I'm SO glad I prepared for the weather.

En route from the staging area, pro-war supporters were in bleachers on one side of us and lined up on the other side. It was probably meant to intimidate us but it didn't. They yelled obscenities and we gave them the peace symbol in return. We listened to a few of the speakers at the Pentagon Rally. The sound system was excellent. But it was so cold that after about an hour we left, walked back across the bridge and caught a cab to the Luna Diner at Dupont Circle to get something to eat and get warm. We met some Viet Nam veterans sitting at the table next to us. They had attended the rally as well. Above are just a few of the collection of pictures I took at the rally.

EPISCOPAL PEACE FELLOWSHIP

Episcopal Peace Fellowship Brunch Saturday, 3/17/07

After doing the four mile candlelight march and White House Peace Vigil the night before many of us were tired and facing more cold weather after our brunch to attend the anti-war march and rally at the Pentagon.

Learn more about The Episcopal Peace Fellowship at http://www.epfnational.org/publish/index.shtml

Lisa in Center, Tim and Terry

Peace Singer, Lisa Dudley and me

Lisa sings "Bring "Em Home, Lord" at the Episcopal Peace Fellowship Brunch on Saturday Morning, 3/17/07 Jackie Lynn, Executive Director, Episcopal Peace Fellowship Two Yale Divinity Students with father of one of them. Couple at the Sat. Episcopal Brunch

Episcopal Peace Fellowship: Our Presence at the Christian Peace Witness for Iraq: March 16, 2007, Washington, DC

Training at St. Mark's, Washington, DC

Training

Waiting for the service to begin

Sign I made for the Event

Many denominations were represented Episcopalians from all over the country joined other denominations in Washington, DC for a service at Washington National Cathedral on Friday evening followed by a 4 mile candlelight walk from the cathedral to the White House. More than 2,000 attended the service and march. Among the speakers was a Dominican Nun from Baghdad and Jim Wallis of Sojourners. It was a wonderful service which ended with us receiving our torches and begin our march down Massachusetts Ave to the White House. It was snowing and really cold outside. It was great to see all of the supporters waving from their houses and apartments, giving the peace sign. One family came out into their driveway and offered folks hot chocolate and the use of the bathroom in their home. Training in preparation for the evening event was held at St. Mark’s Episcopal Church the morning of the event. St. Mark's is located to the southeast of the Capital Bldg. It's a beautiful old church built in the 1800s. This was an experiential training in nonviolence. The training lasted for two hours and consisted of role playing and ways to express ourselves in non-confrontational ways.

OUR LITTLE ROSES

On March 10th 2007, Integrity of the Palm Beaches hosted a Spaghetti Dinner fundraiser for Our Little Roses Ministries. Dr. Diana Frade spoke about this great ministry she started in Honduras in 1988 and Bishop Frade attended as well.

In Honduras where poverty is rampant, abused and neglected children frequently are homeless, starved and oftentimes, ill. For years this is a serious find themselves the plight of abandoned girls ignored.

The wife of the Episcopal Bishop of Southeast Florida, Dr. Diana Frade saw the tremendous need and the ministry of Our Little Roses began in 1988. The ministry started in a small rented house with 26 girls.

In 1990 government officials of the city of San Pedro Sula saw the success and changed lives in the girls at Our Little Roses. They gave some land to the ministry on which two buildings were built and where 76 girls now live.

In Honduras, there is no other facility dedicated to helping abandoned and homeless girls through elementary school through college to break the cycle of poverty and give these girls the opportunity to have a better life. Their education and health care are provided for by the donations of great folks in the U.S., Europe and other countries. This is so important because girls with no skills have little to no opportunities to escape poverty level circumstances.

The Little Roses girls graduating from high school who attend university also hold jobs to help offset some of the expenses of their education. Other ministries housed within the walled campus include Holy Family Bilingual School, chapel and B and B hostel.

There are no governmental social services or funds for Honduran children who become victims of violence, poverty, disease and oppression. The need was desperate in 1988, and it is even more compelling today. Children are often forced onto the streets to fend for themselves when their families cannot or will not care for them. Poverty produces abusive situations for many pre- adolescent girls who are deprived of an education by being kept home to take care of younger siblings, with no adult supervision or oversight.

In 2003, when the Diocese of New Hampshire elected Bishop Gene Robinson as their new Bishop, some Floridians were furious with Bishop Frade for voting in favor of Bishop Robinson. Some donors decided to punish Bishop Frade for his vote by cutting off their pledges to Our Little Roses. But this unchristian act didn’t punish Bishop Frade. It punished the little girls at Our Little Roses.

You can learn more about Our Little Roses at http://www.ourlittleroses.org/

PARLIAMENT ENTERS ANGLICAN FRAY

Pew, what a scorcher: gay schism startles Speaker Simon Hoggart Tuesday March 6, 2007 The Guardian Questions to Stuart Bell, the MP for Middlesbrough who represents the church commissioners in parliament, come round every month. The atmosphere in the chamber subtly changes. There is a hush. The sunlight splashes into the chamber and onto the woodwork as if through stained glass. It takes little imagination to hear the faint sound of organ music, to see the floral offerings on the despatch box. Normally the questions are routine, about funding for church restoration or pensions for retired clergy. Very rarely, there is a small controversy. One was about whether bishops should have their own chauffeurs, or be obliged to drive themselves - whether with the help of SatNav or divine guidance (£249.99 from Halfords) was not clear. But normally nothing disturbs the marmoreal calm. Yesterday however was different. Chris Bryant, a gay Labour MP and former vicar, asked how much it had cost to send the archbishops of Canterbury and York to the Anglican bishops' conference in Dar es Salaam last month. This was the gathering meant to prevent the church's expected schism over the ordination of gay clergy. A compromse was reached, but, as we were to learn, it did not satisfy Mr Bryant. For what it's worth, it turned out that Cantuar's trip cost £2,094, while Ebor came in at a pricier £2,866. This was not, however, the point of Mr Bryant's question. He was furious. It was as if the vicar had asked if anyone knew any just cause or impediment, and someone at the back of the church had started yelling, "Yes, stop! She is married to me!" 'It is particularly depressing," he said, loudly, "that the two British archbishops chose to side with the fundamentalist BIGOTS from other parts of the Anglican communion, rather than representing the ordinary faith of most Anglicans in this country, who are entirely tolerant and decent!" A great "whoooh!" went up, slightly shocked and a little camp. No one was supposed to talk like that. The Speaker was startled. He told Mr Bryant that he should not stray from his question, which was about the costs, not the content of the meeting. But he was not half as cross as Mr Bell. The money had been well invested and well spent, he said. "If he wanted to talk about bigotry and extremism, he could not have done better than he did today!" That was the cue for another "whooo!" Contrary to what Mr Bryant said, the conference had had a good result because it produced an agreed communique on the subject of gay bishops. Mr Bell, who I am sure sounds pious when he is abusing the ref at a Middlesbrough match, concluded "blessed are the peacemakers". Mr Bryant sat on his pew - sorry, bench - fuming. I hoped he would - condemn Mr Bell's reply as a load of old cassocks, but the discussion had moved on.

Praise Jesus! Now The Church of England Can Get Some of the Heat

Jonathan Petre On religion

From the blogs of telegraph.co.uk 02 March 2007 Now that the dust is settling, is it possible to make any sense of what happened last Wednesday evening at the Church of England’s General Synod?

The Church’s “Parliament”, which gathered in the Church’s ivy-veined headquarters in Westminster this week, held two debates on contrasting private members’ motions on homosexuality on what was dubbed “gay” Wednesday.

The first represented a mild shift towards the liberal position by accepting that homosexuals should be included as equals in further dialogue about their place in the Church. But the outcome of the second, initiated by the Rev Paul Perkin, an evangelical from south west London, was so ambiguous that even Synod members were initially left shaking their heads in bewilderment.

Mr Perkin’s motion denounced the House of Bishops’ 2005 pastoral guidance on civil partnerships as a “recipe for confusion” by appearing to lend moral credence to such partnerships even though they are widely regarded as the equivalent of gay marriage. The guidance allows clergy to enter into civil partnerships on the proviso that they first reassure their bishop that they would abstain from sex, thereby remaining faithful to Church teaching. But the bishops have since failed to discipline anyone who has breached their guidance. The thrust of Mr Perkin’s motion was designed to expose their impotence and to try to provoke a more virile approach.

But this did not happen. The House of Bishops’ tabled a blander, more acceptable alternative, aimed at winning an endorsement of its pastoral guidelines while neutralising any significant criticism of them.

Sadly for the House of Bishops, however, its strategy also backfired. An unholy alliance of liberals and conservatives amended its amendment, removing its self-congratulatory if modest description of its own guidance as a “balanced and sensitive” attempt to square Church teaching with the law.

The final motion adopted by the Synod merely acknowledged “the diversity of views within the Church of England on whether Parliament might better have addressed the injustices affecting persons of the same sex wishing to share a common life had it done so in a way that avoided creating a legal framework with many similarities to marriage”. It also noted “the intention of the House to keep their Pastoral Statement under review”.

On the face of it, this does not seem to say very much, though it leaves the bishops’ guidance in a more than questionable state. The conservatives clearly didn’t get their way, but nor did anyone else. Surely, then, the only conclusion is that nothing really substantial had happened. However, the tone of the debate has left conservatives seething and liberals celebrating. What really angered conservative evangelicals was the way that openly gay clergy, whose behaviour appears to be in blatant breach of official Church policy, felt able to stand up in the Synod and talk publicly and unapologetically about their physical relationships with no fear of retribution. To the conservatives, no clearer indication of the bishops inability or unwillingness to act could be imagined.

One evangelical member of the Synod, Alison Ruoff, has reflected this strand of thinking in a letter to the Daily Telegraph. “For me, Wednesday in General Synod was a grim day for the Church of England,” she writes. “Although on the face of it, things might have been worse, when looking at the texts that have come from the debates.

“However, some of the speeches that were made, particularly from members of the clergy, were in many ways truly shocking. No longer is there any shame about anything. Descriptions of ‘loving partnerships’, including the mention of sex, was par for the course. The bishops sat there unmoved. Yet some 10 years ago clergy would have not only have been disciplined but ‘unfrocked’”.

Other evangelicals commented that the Church of England was now heading inexorably down the same path as the liberal Episcopal Church, a somewhat paradoxical situation given the firm stance adopted by the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, following Tanzania. Liberals also sensed a real shift in the Church of England’s mood on gays and civil partnerships in their direction.

InclusiveChurch, the liberal pressure group, issued a press release under the heading of “a good day for the Church of England”, saying that it hoped that the debates reflected “a new understanding and respect for differing theological positions about lesbian and gay people within and outside the Church”.

It said that the motion on civil partnerships showed that “the present arrangements are not working”, and called for same-sex blessings and the appointment of gay bishops. The Rev Giles Fraser, the liberal vicar of Putney in south London, summed up this view. “It seemed to me that the ground shifted,” he said. “There was no appetite in the Synod for going back.”

So what seemed on the surface to be a confusing stalemate might in fact have been be a paradigm shift. It will be fascinating to see how the tectonic plates collide in the coming months, and whether the House of Bishops can contain the shockwaves.

Posted by Jonathan Petre at 02 Mar 07 20:21

FLORIDA RENAISSANCE FESTIVAL

15th ANNUAL FLORIDA RENAISSANCE FESTIVAL

QUIET WATERS PARK

DEERFIELD BEACH, FLORIDA

This great festival keeps getting bigger and better every year. The performances were extremely professional, the food was great and the folks a lot of fun. I really enjoyed the English comedian/magician/storyteller and Robin Hood.

It was also a great break from politics, union, political, anti-war and the state of The Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion.

Quiet Waters Park is a beautiful location for the festival. It's very large, on the banks of a very large lake, the foliage and natural landscaping provides for a great atmosphere.

A WORD FROM THE RIGHT REV. LEO FRADE, EPISCOPAL BISHOP; DIOCESE OF SOUTHEAST FLORIDA

I'm not really sure why Bishop Frade gets the idea that General Convention said no blessings of gay unions. GC never said that. It's true that It didn't say "yes". And it still has not initiated the process for formal rites. But that is not saying "no". It acknowledged that it happens in some dioceses and our GC never has taken any steps to stop it or say that it is not allowed. After reading the sermon, I wonder what motives Bishop Frade has for keeping his Southeast Florida ladder in place. I think he doesn't want to get beat up by the right wing anymore than he already has. But it's time to move that ladder. I'm one of many in this diocese who loves Bishop Frade and will support him. He would not be going it alone, He will in fact, have much support. It's time to respect and practice our congregational vow in our prayer book:

"Will you strive for justice and peace among all people and respect the dignity of every human being?"

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

Bishop Frade's Sermon given to

the Consortium of Endowed

Episcopal Parishes at

All Saints Episcopal Church

Fort Lauderdale, FL

March 1, 200

Welcome to this wonderful place that we call Southeast Florida. We hope that you will enjoy all of the wonderful things that you can do here in winter. None of them will require heaters, thermal underwear, or snow blowers.

I am indeed very fortunate to be the bishop of this tropical diocese that covers Southeast Florida from Key West in the south all the way to Hutchinson Island in the north. Sandwiched in-between we have glamorous places like Isla Morada, Ocean Reef, South Beach, Miami and Ft. Lauderdale Beach, Boca Raton, Palm Beach and Hobe Sound. It is a rough job but somebody has to do it.

But of course we are not perfect. This is the area, if you recall, that brought you all the excitement of the hanging chads, the little Cuban boy Elian Gonzalez that Janet Reno sent back to Castro at gun point; you are now in the place that OJ chose to live with all of his unused cutlery; and of course just a few days before you arrived we were able to come up with a crazy taxi driver crying judge and also plethora of paternity suits and DNA testing. Actually I am one of the few men at this time that doesn’t claim to be the biological father of Anna Nicole’s baby daughter.

But I must warn you that before you quit your jobs and decide to rush down here to enjoy all the excitement of Southeast Florida you have to be aware that this is also the area that hurricanes love to visit.

But enough talk of Southeast Florida. I want to talk to you about a ladder.A particular ladder. This ladder is found in the Holy Land. If you look at any photograph or drawing of the front of the Church of the Holy Sepulcher dating back to 1840 you will notice a ladder placed there in the window ledge a little bit to the right of the church.

My wife Diana and I just returned from our 8th pilgrimage to the Holy Land. I’m sure I don’t need to tell you how wonderful this experience is. But in all of my previous visits I never noticed the ladder. I asked a Christian Palestinian friend why the ladder was there. He smiled and began to tell me the story.

He claimed that there were several versions of why it was there. The ladder was part of the ‘Status Quo” and it had to remain there, even when it rots it has to be replaced with another wooden ladder. Nothing can be changed even if there is no need for a ladder anymore.

His version had it that the ladder was first introduced during the Turkish Ottoman Empire. The Muslim Turks taxed Christian clergy every time they left and entered the Holy Sepulcher church. The clergy who served the church avoided going out as rarely as possible so they set up living quarters in the Holy Sepulcher church.

The window, ladder and ledge all belong to the Armenian Orthodox Church. The ledge served as a balcony for the Armenian clergy. It was their only opportunity to get fresh air and sunshine without paying the Turkish Muslim tax. Some said that they even grew fresh vegetables on the ledge.

In 1937 after an earthquake that happened in Jerusalem an Armenian monk came down the ladder and began to clean the debris that had fallen on the ledge. In order to move the rubble he had to move the ladder and by doing so he violated the Status Quo that came from a ‘firman’ or edict issued by the Ottoman Sultan in 1757 and reaffirmed in 1852. That edict defined the rights of the different Christian denominations that share that church.

The consequences of moving the ladder is that a major turmoil took place when the Greek Orthodox could not fathom anyone making any changes for whatever reason even if it made sense. The end result was that the Armenian monk was attacked and since then no one has dared to move the ladder.

Actually that has not been the only major fight that has taken place in that holy temple. More recently in the summer of 2002 a Coptic Monk who is stationed on the roof of the church to guard the Coptic claims to the Ethiopian part of the roof dared to move his chair from its agreed spot from the sun into the shade. This of course was seen by the Ethiopian Orthodox as an invasion of property.

The end result, the Jerusalem police tells us that eleven monks both Coptic Orthodox and Ethiopian Orthodox ended up in the hospital after the resulting fracas.

In September of 2004 another major fight occurred when a Franciscan Roman Catholic monk refused to close the door of the Roman chapel at the request of the Greek Patriarch Irenaus that was leading at the time a procession to commemorate the Blessed Cross of Christ. As he passed by in front of the Roman Catholic area he asked a Franciscan monk to close the door of the Roman chapel. I imagine that he preferred not to see any of the Latin decorations of the Chapel.

The results of this ecumenical encounter according to the Jerusalem police is that 4 Greek monks were arrested, and a Franciscan monk required medical attention because he was bodily attacked by the Orthodox.

Probably you know other shameful stories of how bad Christians get along with each other not only in the Holy Land but also around the world. Luckily for us as Anglicans we don’t have to worry about that. Or do we?

Well yes we do and that is why I want to talk about that ladder, or should I say the need to move our ladder.

It seems that we Episcopalians have been moving the Anglican ladder too much.It probably started when we elected our first bishop in America. We sent him to the Mother Church and he was refused to be consecrated by Canterbury because he was unable to pledge allegiance to the British King that we had just managed to defeat. Actually it was our first bishop that in rebellion moved the ladder when he went with the Jacobites in Scotland for consecration.

Our Episcopal Church and our particular polity were not established during a colonial time instead when we were founded we also came up with a peculiar and different polity in a free America over 200 years ago. We moved the ladder when we made the changes. We eliminated anything that smelled like an Archbishop and managed to remove part of the imperial power of the bishops.We even decided to share that power with the presbyters and the laity and came up with something that we called today the House of Deputies.No official decision can be made in this Church without them.

I began to think of how many other times we moved the ladder. Was it when we allowed birth control or decided not let the mother die during childbirth in order to save the baby? Or was it when we allowed divorced Episcopalians to remarry in the church.

Let me see what else? Oh yes, women’s ordination. I was there in 1976 when we moved the ladder again and voted in Minneapolis to approve the ordination of women to the presbyterate and the episcopacy.

Of course at the same time we up the ante a little more by also changing our Prayer Book to reflect modern English as it was spoken in America during the 20th Century.

It looks like we have been moving the ladder for a long time. It just happens that we are what we are. It’s not easy for others from far away to understand who we are. We are what we are. We were not formed because we were a colony of England that handed over sovereignty. We came to be Episcopalians precisely because we spent years and shed lots of blood fighting the British.

Everything has a consequence and moving the ladder makes people crazy. I know that very well because when I voted with the majority of our church to consent to the consecration of the bishop of New Hampshire I was the recipient of considerable irrational behavior. I was aware that there were going to be some in my diocese that were not going to agree with me but I never realized the angry and almost irrational and bitter reaction of some people that love to call themselves Orthodox.

Let me tell you what happened. When I was the Bishop of Honduras, where I served as Bishop for 17 years my wife Diana responding to the need that little girls had for shelter and in order to prevent their abuse she started a home for abandoned, abused and orphaned girls that today houses and educate over 75 girls, it includes also a school with over 200 students and a clinic to help the indigent of Honduras. Today we have graduated 2 of those girls from the university; we have 14 girls presently studying in the university and over 20 in High School.

But to my amazement after the General Convention of 2003 we began to receive angry letters and cancellation of sponsorships from different parts of this country explaining their cancellation of the sponsorship was because Diana as the Director of the home was also married to this horrible bishop that had voted to give his consent in Minneapolis.

Our Little Roses, a home for abandoned, orphaned and abused girls, a home that is not even in my diocese but in Central America was deprived of over $60,000 dollars of annual sponsorship by angry and irrational people that were willing to hurt and starve the girls in order to somehow hurt me.I find this amazing because those beautiful Honduran girls may know who George Clooney or Brad Pitt are but I am sure that they don’t have the foggiest of who Gene Robinson is.

The girls suffered because of this irrational and inhuman reaction. Since then we have recover some because other people gave us a hand, coming from places like All Saints, Ft. Lauderdale, including their Integrity Chapter.

We still need help so if you happen to have some money around to support the abused, abandoned and orphaned girls of Our Little Roses in Honduras please give us a hand.If you need more information talk to me or to Diana. The girls need your help. We will be around today and tomorrow or search the Web: www.ourlittleroses.org has all the information. I partially apologize for begging for the orphans but those girls need our help and I couldn’t resist the opportunity for a commercial. Now let me get back to the ladder.

We have been told not to move the ladder. I think the message has arrived to us loud and clear.

We are all aware that we have recently received directives from a communiqué that the way it is written requests from us to be a different Episcopal Church. The problem I see as an Episcopalian in America is that they are asking us to look to Leviticus 20 that inform us who to stone and not to Leviticus 19 that inform us who to love.

Now, I do not want for you to get the wrong impression. You are not in a liberal diocese. I am not a liberal bishop.Ethnically and by birth I am a III World Bishop. It has been six and a half years since I arrived to Southeast Florida from an III World diocese in Central America where I served for almost two decades. I was also born in the III World in a country that the United States has tried to defeat for years but because of the bad aim of the CIA has been unable to. But this American church decided to move the ladder one more time and now this Cuban refugee boy also happens to be the bishop of Southeast Florida. As Ricky Ricardo used to say to Lucy:“Honey I’m home.”

This is now my home and you are in a diocese that has been in complete compliance with the directives of the Windsor Report even before it occurred to the Primates to prepare it.Now this is also a diocese that recognizes that because of our policies we are discriminating and forbidding the participation of all the baptized into the ordained ministry. We recognize that we can bless dogs and cats, cars and all kinds of boats, homes and businesses but we have to refrain from blessing our faithful, believers in Christ that have lived a monogamous respectable life for decades but happen to be of a different sexual orientation.

We do this not because of the demands of foreign prelates but because we believe that it is not allowed by our American General Convention.

In past years we continued our conversation and many in our midst have worked hard in order that our General Convention eventually will allow the full inclusion of all the baptized members into its leadership and give its blessing to all of its members. And now it seems to me that they want us to stop discussing and to stop thinking.

We are supposed to find ways to ignore all the new evidence of science and also we have to show partiality with our sisters and brothers of different sexual orientations with whom we share this church and inform them that they have to continue being second class Episcopalians.

I fervently pray that we may continue in the Anglican Communion but I want to continue in it as an Episcopalian.

I am committed to continue being part of the Anglican Communion but I also want you to know that I am faithful to this Church that was God’s instrument to bring me to Christ and whose form of government was established more than two centuries ago.

I want to continue being a faithful member of this church that for centuries has been sending and keeps sending prayers, financial resources and missionaries to all parts of the world in order to proclaim the Gospel of Christ. We are part of a church that has brought Christ to the world including some of the areas that today point an accusing finger at us.

I firmly believe that if our founders wanted to have the same church polity of other parts of the Communion where presbyters and laity don’t have an equal voice as bishops then they would have chosen to move to Canada or the UK and join those who opposed our justice and independence.

I don’t know how the House of Bishops will respond this coming March when we meet in Texas. I for one will support my Presiding Bishop; Gosh I forgot that!A woman Primate, that’s another time when we moved the ladder.Roman Bishops say that they back the Holy Father; well as an Episcopal Bishop I say that I back the Holy Mother.

It is my fervent prayer that we can find the way towards reconciliation. I am willing to make the necessary sacrifices in all humility but I hope that the rest of the Communion will respect who we are as Episcopalians.

I pray that whatever we do will be seen with pleasure in the eyes of Jesus Christ. A Christ that loves and cares for all and that also calls us to love our neighbor as ourselves.

We are Christians, yes we are.

We are Anglicans, yes we are.

But we are also Episcopalians,

and yes we are what we are.

I want to end with the words of the German singer Paul Van Dyk when he expresses his sentiments in his song: Wir Sind Wir = We are what we are:

“We’re what we are

We’re standing here

We’re not going down

No time to be angry

We’re what we are

We’re standing here

We’re what we are

Divided, defeated and else

But finally, we still exist!

We’re what we are

We will get over it

Because life has to go on

We’re what we are.

This is just a bad phase

We will never give up!

Amen.

http://www.cafepress.com/fartotheleft

Read, Put the Dots Together, Weep, Get Mad and ACT!

The Walter Reed stories of mold,rodents,feces and patient neglect is much worse than we thought. When we thought that our government officials would actually do something, some of us expressed relief when we watched repairmen fixing the problem. Wrong. They didn't remove the mold, just painted over it. And remember the Congressman's wife from Florida who was escorted out of The State of the Union Speech in 2006 for wearing her "Support the Troops" tee-shirt? Well, today I found out why they put her out. And oh my gosh....Donald Rumsfeld. I hadn't thought about Rummy in awhile. Then he surfaced in the media this week when it got found out that his wife had visited the soldiers in Walter Reed and went home and asked Donald some questions. Oh my gosh! All hell broke loose. I don't know if she's filed for a divorce yet or not. She ought to. She's married to a total, 100% CREEP! Washingtonpost.com Hospital Officials Knew of NeglectComplaints About Walter Reed Were Voiced for Years By Anne Hull and Dana Priest Washington Post Staff Writers Thursday, March 1, 2007

Hospital Officials Knew of NeglectComplaints About Walter Reed Were Voiced for Years By Anne Hull and Dana PriestWashington Post Staff WritersThursday, March 1, 2007; A01 Top officials at Walter Reed Army Medical Center, including the Army's surgeon general, have heard complaints about outpatient neglect from family members, veterans groups and members of Congress for more than three years.

A procession of Pentagon and Walter Reed officials expressed surprise last week about the living conditions and bureaucratic nightmares faced by wounded soldiers staying at the D.C. medical facility. But as far back as 2003, the commander of Walter Reed, Lt. Gen. Kevin C. Kiley, who is now the Army's top medical officer, was told that soldiers who were wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan were languishing and lost on the grounds, according to interviews.

Steve Robinson, director of veterans affairs at Veterans for America, said he ran into Kiley in the foyer of the command headquarters at Walter Reed shortly after the Iraq war began and told him that "there are people in the barracks who are drinking themselves to death and people who are sharing drugs and people not getting the care they need."

"I met guys who weren't going to appointments because the hospital didn't even know they were there," Robinson said. Kiley told him to speak to a sergeant major, a top enlisted officer. A recent Washington Post series detailed conditions at Walter Reed, including those at Building 18, a dingy former hotel on Georgia Avenue where the wounded were housed among mice, mold, rot and cockroaches.

Kiley lives across the street from Building 18. From his quarters, he can see the scrappy building and busy traffic the soldiers must cross to get to the 113-acre post. At a news conference last week, Kiley, who declined several requests for interviews for this article, said that the problems of Building 18 "weren't serious and there weren't a lot of them." He also said they were not "emblematic of a process of Walter Reed that has abandoned soldiers and their families." But according to interviews, Kiley, his successive commanders at Walter Reed and various top noncommissioned officers in charge of soldiers' lives have heard a stream of complaints about outpatient treatment over the past several years. The complaints have surfaced at town hall meetings for staff and soldiers, at commanders' "sensing sessions" in which soldiers or officers are encouraged to speak freely, and in several inspector general's reports detailing building conditions, safety issues and other matters.

Retired Maj. Gen. Kenneth L. Farmer Jr., who commanded Walter Reed for two years until last August, said that he was aware of outpatient problems and that there were "ongoing reviews and discussions" about how to fix them when he left. He said he shared many of those issues with Kiley, his immediate commander. Last summer when he turned over command to Maj. Gen. George W. Weightman, Farmer said, "there were a variety of things we identified as opportunities for continued improvement."

In 2004, Rep. C.W. Bill Young (R-Fla.) and his wife stopped visiting the wounded at Walter Reed out of frustration. Young said he voiced concerns to commanders over troubling incidents he witnessed but was rebuffed or ignored. "When Bev or I would bring problems to the attention of authorities of Walter Reed, we were made to feel very uncomfortable," said Young, who began visiting the wounded recuperating at other facilities.

Beverly Young said she complained to Kiley several times. She once visited a soldier who was lying in urine on his mattress pad in the hospital. When a nurse ignored her, Young said, "I went flying down to Kevin Kiley's office again, and got nowhere. He has skirted this stuff for five years and blamed everyone else."

Young said that even after Kiley left Walter Reed to become the Army's surgeon general, "if anything could have been done to correct problems, he could have done it." Soldiers and family members say their complaints have been ignored by commanders at many levels.

More than a year ago, Chief Warrant Officer Jayson Kendrick, an outpatient, attended a sensing session, the Army's version of a town hall meeting where concerns are raised in front of the chain of command. Kendrick spoke about the deterioration and crowded conditions of the outpatient administrative building, which had secondhand computers and office furniture shoved into cubicles, creating chaos for family members. An inspector general attending the meeting "chuckled and said, 'What do you want, pool tables and Ping-Pong tables in there?' " Kendrick recalled.

Army officials have been at other meetings in which outpatient problems were detailed. On Feb. 17, 2005, Kiley sat in a congressional hearing room as Sgt. 1st Class John Allen, injured in Afghanistan in 2002, described what he called a "dysfunctional system" at Walter Reed in which "soldiers go months without pay, nowhere to live, their medical appointments canceled." Allen added: "The result is a massive stress and mental pain causing further harm. It would be very easy to correct the situation if the command element climate supported it. The command staff at Walter Reed needs to show their care."

In 2006, Joe Wilson, a clinical social worker in the department of psychiatry, briefed several colonels at Walter Reed about problems and steps that could be taken to improve living conditions at Building 18. Last March, he also shared the findings of a survey his department had conducted.

It found that 75 percent of outpatients said their experience at Walter Reed had been "stressful" and that there was a "significant population of unsatisfied, frustrated, disenfranchised patients." Military commanders played down the findings. "These people knew about it," Wilson said. "The bottom line is, people knew about it but the culture of the Army didn't allow it to be addressed."

Last October, Joyce Rumsfeld, the wife of then-Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, was taken to Walter Reed by a friend concerned about outpatient treatment. She attended a weekly meeting, called Girls Time Out, at which wives, girlfriends and mothers of soldiers exchange stories and offer support.

According to three people who attended the gathering, Rumsfeld listened quietly. Some of the women did not know who she was. At the end of the meeting, Rumsfeld asked one of the staff members whether she thought that the soldiers her husband was meeting on his visits had been handpicked to paint a rosy picture of their time there. The answer was yes.

When Walter Reed officials found out that Rumsfeld had visited, they told the friend who brought her -- a woman who had volunteered there many times -- that she was no longer welcome on the grounds.

Last week, the Army relieved of duty several low-ranking soldiers who managed outpatients. This week, in a move that some soldiers viewed as reprisal for speaking to the media, the wounded troops were told that early-morning room inspections would be held and that further contact with reporters is prohibited.

Yesterday, Walter Reed received an unscheduled inspection by a hospital accreditation agency. Members of the Joint Commission, formerly the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations, began a two-day visit "for cause" to examine discharge practices that have allowed soldiers to go missing or unaccounted for after they are released from the hospital. -----------------------------------------------------------------

Editor & Publisher

www.editorandpublisher.com Military Press Crackdown Extends Further Than Walter Reed

By Joe Strupp

Published: February 28, 2007 2:45 PM ET

NEW YORK A report today that soldiers at Walter Reed Army Medical Center are being told not to speak with the press is apparently just the latest move in a recent effort to tighten restrictions on journalists' access to many military facilities, according to the president of Military Reporters and Editors.

James Crawley, a military reporter with MediaGeneral and MRE president, said today's revelation by Army Times that Walter Reed patients had been barred from speaking with reporters is not the first case of tightened restrictions.

In recent months, he says several MRE members have reported similar crackdowns. What's worse, many of the denials are apparently in reaction to the potential negativity of a planned story."

It is starting to look like it is becoming a policy in some areas where they are not allowing reporters on the base unless it is an absolutely positively good news story," said Crawley. "The military is making it harder and harder to do stories on bases, as far as doing man on the street interviews."

A Pentagon spokesman contacted by E&P had no immediate comment.Crawley's accusations followed today's Times story, which reported that Walter Reed patients had been muzzled just a week after The Washington Post revealed that outpatients at the facility were forced to live in rundown, poorly maintained housing.

The Times also reported that "The Pentagon ... clamped down on media coverage of any and all Defense Department medical facilities, to include suspending planned projects by CNN and the Discovery Channel, saying in an e-mail to spokespeople: 'It will be in most cases not appropriate to engage the media while [the Walter Reed] review takes place.'"

But some MRE members said that the clampdown is in place at other military facilities, not just medical centers. Sig Christenson, former MRE president and military writer at the San Antonio Express-News, cited two recent instances of access denials he received.Several weeks ago, he said he was denied entrance to Brooke Army Medical Center in San Antonio for a story related to the 3,000th death in Iraq. Just this week, he said Lackland Air Force Base had refused to let him in for a story related to the recent controversy surrounding drill sergeant Michelle Manhart, who was demoted by the Air Force for posing in Playboy."I wanted to spend some time with the trainers there and show how they instill core values and integrity in these troops," said Christenson. "They refused me access because Michelle Manhart was part of the story.

They did not want to support another story that had Michelle Manhart in it."Christenson said the denials were serious because they were apparently in reaction to the subject of the story, not any security issue. "This is the first time in 10 years that any installation had denied me access on the basis of the content of my reporting," Christenson, a multiple Iraq embed, said. "It is a really dangerous thing that raises a lot of issues. It raises the question of my credibility."Crawley agreed. "This is troublesome because it keeps the average person from learning the real facts here," he said. "They are trying to censor the news, in this case it is bad news.

The military has gone into a bunker mentality." He also had heard reports from some reporters that casualty numbers were not being released as freely as in the past. "They are trying to manage the news," he said. "There has to be some middle ground and in the past there has been middle ground."***Related E&P story: Wounded Soldiers Told Not to Talk to Media Joe Strupp (http://www.mediainfo.com/eandp/news/mailto:jstrupp@editorandpublisher.com) is a senior editor at E&P. Links referenced within this article Wounded Soldiers Told Not to Talk to Mediahttp://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003551454jstrupp@editorandpublisher.comhttp://www.mediainfo.com/eandp/news/mailto:jstrupp@editorandpublisher.com Find this article at: http://www.mediainfo.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003551716

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

ARMY TIMES

Walter Reed patients told to keep quiet By Kelly Kennedy - Staff writer

Posted : Wednesday Feb 28, 2007 20:26:13 EST Soldiers at Walter Reed Army Medical Center’s Medical Hold Unit say they have been told they will wake up at 6 a.m. every morning and have their rooms ready for inspection at 7 a.m., and that they must not speak to the media.

“Some soldiers believe this is a form of punishment for the trouble soldiers caused by talking to the media,” one Medical Hold Unit soldier said, speaking on the condition of anonymity. It is unusual for soldiers to have daily inspections after Basic Training.

Soldiers say their sergeant major gathered troops at 6 p.m. Monday to tell them they must follow their chain of command when asking for help with their medical evaluation paperwork, or when they spot mold, mice or other problems in their quarters.

They were also told they would be moving out of Building 18 to Building 14 within the next couple of weeks. Building 14 is a barracks that houses the administrative offices for the Medical Hold Unit and was renovated in 2006. It’s also located on the Walter Reed Campus, where reporters must be escorted by public affairs personnel. Building 18 is located just off campus and is easy to access.

The soldiers said they were also told their first sergeant has been relieved of duty, and that all of their platoon sergeants have been moved to other positions at Walter Reed. And 120 permanent-duty soldiers are expected to arrive by mid-March to take control of the Medical Hold Unit, the soldiers said.

As of Tuesday afternoon, Army public affairs did not respond to a request sent Sunday evening to verify the personnel changes. The Pentagon also clamped down on media coverage of any and all Defense Department medical facilities, to include suspending planned projects by CNN and the Discovery Channel, saying in an e-mail to spokespeople: “It will be in most cases not appropriate to engage the media while this review takes place,” referring to an investigation of the problems at Walter Reed.

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

'Wash Post': Top Officials Knew About Walter Reed Problems Long Ago By E&P Staff Published: March 01, 2007 12:05 AM ET NEW YORK Continuing with their scoops in this area well into a second week, Anne Hull and Dana Priest on Thursday reveal in a front-page Washington Post story that top officials at Walter Reed Army Medical Center, including the Army's surgeon general, "have heard complaints about outpatient neglect from family members, veterans groups and members of Congress for more than three years."A procession of Pentagon and Walter Reed officials expressed surprise last week about the living conditions and bureaucratic nightmares faced by wounded soldiers staying at the D.C. medical facility," they write. "But as far back as 2003, the commander of Walter Reed, Lt. Gen. Kevin C. Kiley, who is now the Army's top medical officer, was told that soldiers who were wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan were languishing and lost on the grounds, according to interviews...."In 2004, Rep. C.W. Bill Young (R-Fla.) and his wife stopped visiting the wounded at Walter Reed out of frustration. Young said he voiced concerns to commanders over troubling incidents he witnessed but was rebuffed or ignored. 'When Bev or I would bring problems to the attention of authorities of Walter Reed, we were made to feel very uncomfortable,' said Young, who began visiting the wounded recuperating at other facilities."Beverly Young said she complained to Kiley several times. She once visited a soldier who was lying in urine on his mattress pad in the hospital. When a nurse ignored her, Young said, 'I went flying down to Kevin Kiley's office again, and got nowhere. He has skirted this stuff for five years and blamed everyone else.'"Soldiers and family members say their complaints have been ignored by commanders at many levels."The rest of the report can be found at www.washingtonpost.com.

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

EDITOR AND PUBLISHER

'Wash Post': Top Officials Knew About Walter Reed Problems Long Ago

By E&P Staff

Published: March 01, 2007 12:05 AM ET

NEW YORK Continuing with their scoops in this area well into a second week, Anne Hull and Dana Priest on Thursday reveal in a front-page Washington Post story that top officials at Walter Reed Army Medical Center, including the Army's surgeon general, "have heard complaints about outpatient neglect from family members, veterans groups and members of Congress for more than three years."

A procession of Pentagon and Walter Reed officials expressed surprise last week about the living conditions and bureaucratic nightmares faced by wounded soldiers staying at the D.C. medical facility," they write. "But as far back as 2003, the commander of Walter Reed, Lt. Gen. Kevin C. Kiley, who is now the Army's top medical officer, was told that soldiers who were wounded in Iraq and Afghanistan were languishing and lost on the grounds, according to interviews....

"In 2004, Rep. C.W. Bill Young (R-Fla.) and his wife stopped visiting the wounded at Walter Reed out of frustration. Young said he voiced concerns to commanders over troubling incidents he witnessed but was rebuffed or ignored. 'When Bev or I would bring problems to the attention of authorities of Walter Reed, we were made to feel very uncomfortable,' said Young, who began visiting the wounded recuperating at other facilities."

Beverly Young said she complained to Kiley several times. She once visited a soldier who was lying in urine on his mattress pad in the hospital. When a nurse ignored her, Young said, 'I went flying down to Kevin Kiley's office again, and got nowhere. He has skirted this stuff for five years and blamed everyone else.'"Soldiers and family members say their complaints have been ignored by commanders at many levels."The rest of the report can be found at www.washingtonpost.com.

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

St. Petersburg Times

T-shirt earns exit from House gallery

Beverly Young, the outspoken wife of U.S. Rep. C.W. Bill Young, says officers objected to her "Support the Troops" shirt.

By BILL ADAIR, Times Washington Bureau Chief

Published February 1, 2006

WASHINGTON - Beverly Young, wife of Rep. C.W. Bill Young of Indian Shores, said she was ejected from the House gallery during Tuesday night's State of the Union address because she was wearing a T-shirt that said "Support the Troops - Defending Our Freedom." Young said she was sitting in the gallery's front row, about six seats from first lady Laura Bush, when she was approached by someone from the Capitol Police or sergeant-at-arms office who told her she needed to leave the gallery. She reluctantly agreed but argued with several officers in the hallway outside the House chamber.

"They said I was protesting," she said in a telephone interview late Tuesday. "I said, "Read my shirt, it is not a protest.' They said, "We consider that a protest.' I said, "Then you are an idiot."' She said she was so angry that "I got real colorful with them."

They told her she was being treated the same as Cindy Sheehan, an antiwar protester who was ejected before the speech Tuesday night for wearing a T-shirt with an antiwar slogan and refusing to cover it up.

Young, 50, said her shirt was not a protest but a message of support for U.S. soldiers and Marines fighting for their country. She often wears the T-shirts when visiting her husband at the Capitol and during her visits to see the wounded at military hospitals.

Sgt. Kimberly Schneider of the Capitol Police could not provide details about the incident but said, "She was not ejected from the gallery. She did leave on her own."

Young's husband, a Republican who chairs the House appropriations subcommittee on defense, was unaware she was removed until after the speech. He said he was furious about the incident. "I just called for the chief of police and asked him to get his little tail over here," Rep. Young said late Tuesday. "This is not acceptable." Beverly Young said, "Wait until the president finds out."

© Copyright, St. Petersburg Times. All rights reserved.

Is A DIVORCE LOOMING OVER THE EPICOPAL CHURCH & THE ANGLICAN COMMUNION?

I found this great NY Times Op-Ed piece which explains the history of the current state of affairs in the Anglican Communion. In the grand scheme of things, if the U.S. Church and the Anglican Communion divorce, it can actually free up The Episcopal Church to utilize the $750,000 + that it spends on the Anglican Communion to further it's ministry so important to Episcopalians. These would include more funding for the United Nations Global Millennium Fund, Episcopal Relief and Development Fund, the ability to fund more missionaries and last but not least, the ability to continue its ministry of social justice. March 1, 2007 Op-Ed Contributor A Divorce the Church Should Smile Upon By JACK MILES Los Angeles THE decision of the global Anglican Communion to threaten the Episcopal Church, its American affiliate, with expulsion is about much more than the headline issue of homosexuality. Yes, the impending divorce has been precipitated by the decision of the Episcopal Church to consecrate a gay bishop and to allow individual congregations to decide whether or not to allow gay marriages. But as so often in religious history, the deeper issue is one of church governance. In effect, the Episcopalians left the Church of England more than two centuries ago. The problem dates back to the time of the American Revolution, when the Church of England in America was just what that name says: it was the Church of England, merely in America. Since the 16th century, when King Henry VIII made himself, in effect, the pope of England, the English king had been the supreme church authority. Time had somewhat eroded this authority by 1776, thanks in part to the Puritan revolution in the mid-17th century. Nonetheless, the authority structure within the church remained officially monarchical. More Here: http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/01/opinion/01miles.html?ex=1173416400&en=11054ed115380b35&ei=5070&emc=eta1