The Jesus Movement

Led by its Presiding Bishop,

The Episcopal Church has

embarked on an adventure

called, “The Jesus Movement.”

According to Wikipedia,

the title originated in the 60s

for a congress of hippies and

so-called “Jesus freaks.”

Ageing baby boomers will

remember the groups at their

colleges which were a mixture

of Pentecostals and Evangelicals.

That Jesus Movement and

its name vanished in the 70s

and the name has now been

appropriated by TEC.

The new Jesus Movement

seems to be aimed at

developing a spiritual

relationship with Jesus.

The video of Bishop Curry

walking down Fifth Avenue,

speaking to an invisible audience

does not offer clarity.

TEC has instituted a five point

series which is supposed to

teach us to become loving,

liberating, and life-giving.

One might observe that such

is already the principal task

of church, to educate and prepare

us to follow Jesus in our lives.

Evangelicals -- Who Are We?

In the first third of her mammoth tome,

“Evangelicals, Struggle to Shape America,”

Frances Fitzgerald traces the origin

of the term, Evangelicals.

She writes that Evangelicals

are an early 20^th Century

spinoff from fundamentalists

and their unscientific beliefs.

Apparently, the name did not

emerge until the Billy Graham

revivals and his founding of the

magazine, Christianity Today.

The term also was used at

the Lausanne Movement Conference

held in 1974, and the ensuing efforts

of John Stott and J.I. Packer.

People did not identify

as Evangelicals until recently,

still calling themselves members

of a specific Christian denomination.

It was a system of beliefs

that coalesced into Evangelicalism,

regardless of the denomination

in which they worshipped.

Evangelicals are now found in

all the mainline denominations

in varying degree, and are the

norm in a few large ones.

Simply put, Evangelicals believe

that the bible is the guide to salvation

and the moral code has to be viewed

in the light of the New Testament.

Evangelicals concentrate on three tasks:

conversion, bringing people to God,

discipleship, learning Christianity, and

service, practicing their faith in the world.

Gnostic Gospels

October 10, 2017

Gnostic Gospels

We have recently been treated

to exposition of the so-called

Gnostic gospels, without any

announced purpose for their review.

All we laymen know about them is that

a rather large number of early Christians

wrote sayings attributed to Jesus that

never made it into the New Testament.

It is easy to see why, in that their

efforts are obviously made up and

wholly lacking the clarity and majesty

of the included passages in the bible.

That still leaves the question as to

why the sudden interest in them.

Could it be inspired by a resistance

to the present contents of the bible?

It is well-known that the bible is

not kind to persons who prefer a

lightweight Christianity which

makes no demands in their lives.

Episcopalians partly solve this

problem by deleting verses from

the daily lectionary that are not

in sync with modern secular mores.

They cannot rewrite the bible,

but perhaps they can add excerpts

from the ancient writings that are

more acceptable to their congregants.

If so, playing up the wisdom of the

Gnostic gospels, and other sources

continues the drive to refashion a

religion far from its origin.

October 30, 2017


Yes, indeed, some biblical scholars are promoting an alternative New Testament, replacing or erasing passages which they believe are offensive. Their publications are based on early Christian writings which are generations removed from the eyewitness accounts in the presently accepted bible. The objective seems to be compiling a New Testament closer to contemporary mores and values. This helps to explain why TEC is not a biblically-centered denomination. 

https://www.amazon.com/New-Testament-Twenty.../dp/0544570103

The problem is that our "progressive" clergy are already preaching the Gospel According to Rob Bell. The lectionary has been edited to omit bible verses that are offensive, as you pointed out. On the agenda is a rewrite of the BCP, which will probably include non-biblical rites. Next, the non-canonical writings may be approved for use in our worship services. Then you have a rewritten Bible, something that has not occurred for nearly two thousand years!

Social Justice

What is social justice?

everyone is for it,

no one is against it, but

no one knows what it is.

We know that “social”

means interrelationship

of people in society, in

groups large and small.

We are afraid that justice is:

“Bring in the guilty SOB,

so we can give him a fair trial,

then take him out and hang him!”

"When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said,

in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what

I choose it to mean—neither more nor less."   

"The question is," said Alice, "whether you

can make words mean so many different things.”

And that’s exactly what social justice is:

a concept that the user claims to follow

when only he or she knows what it is

supposed to communicate to the recipient.

It could be like Mrs. Pardiggle in

Dickens’ Bleak House who visited

the poor to aid them and also demonstrate

her superiority to the unfortunate.

Social justice has also been applied

to the redistribution of wealth, which

demonizes the rich, and often showers

undeserved benefits on the masses.

Even worse is the notion that

all persons are entitled to equal results

in their endeavors, rather than equal

opportunity to achieve them.

These and many other definitions

and derivations are covered in

extraordinary length in the article

on social justice in Wikipedia.

Takeover of TEC

The time is ripe to advocate.

organize, and mount a takeover

of The Episcopal Church and

restore its traditional beliefs.

TEC is bankrupt in ideas

and finances, rudderless, and

losing its grip upon a declining

number of members in the pews.

Fourteen years ago, a small

group of “progressive” activists

inflicted an agenda upon us that

destroyed the Anglican communion.

Since then, the rites and practices

of The Episcopal Church and its

cohorts have strayed further from

biblical and traditional beliefs.  

Now the novelty of same-sex

weddings, open communion, and

abandonment of repentance has

marginalized a once stately church.

Only a sturdy minority of such

clergy as The Community Partners

keeps the flame of orthodoxy alive

in its disparate jurisdictions.

They and concerned laity can be

the force of renewal, loudly

proclaiming truth and demanding

reversal of false doctrine.

Episcopal Evangelicals

Most people would think that

the term, “Episcopalian Evangelicals”

is an oxymoron, and that such

persons really cannot exist.

Not so, quite a few are

alive and well and singularly

untroubled by the ambiguity

of their position in their church.

First, there are the ancients,

those lifelong Episcopalians

who cling to a local parish

that they know and love.

It is not that they have

accepted the progressive

theology of the denomination,

they simply ignore it.

In some parts of the country,

notably New England,

there are few alternatives

to the Episcopal liturgy.

Therefore, our evangelicals

show up in Episcopal churches

to worship God and participate

in the community activities.

Greater numbers of

Episcopal Evangelicals

are found in traditional

parishes and dioceses.

Their parishioners take

the position of the leaders

of same who are committed

to traditional beliefs.

Then there are those clergy

who cling to their positions

in order to protect their

lifelong Episcopal pensions.

We cannot be critical of

any of these Evangelicals

because they represent a

stand against apostasy.

Update at St.David's

February 1, 2017

Update at St. David's

Our little Episcopal church
is  energetically continuing to
dig a hole already dug, without
much thought about the future.

They received a 10K grant
from the diocese and a
bequest of 35K from some
dear old soul who passed on.

Facing a budget deficit of 46K,
they decided to give away 33K
while at the same time drawing
55K from endowment funds!

Our new lady rector started off
on the right foot by returning
the Sunday service to Rite 2
of the Book of Common Prayer.

Then, apparently, the elders
talked her into reverting to a
sappy service stolen from the
Australian prayer book.

At rhe annual parish meeting,
she announced that she did not
want to hit the endowment again
to cover a planned deficit of 64K.

As the only way to avoid that
is to attract new members,
virtually nothing is planned to
market the church to reach them.

Meanwhile, the rainbow flag
and the Episcopal flag droop
listlessly from the message
board in front of the church.

The elders are seeking a grant
from the town to restore the
"historic" Mission house
used as office and thrift shop.

The building is a fire trap
that is falling apart, and could
never be rebuilt without tearing
it down to the foundation.

A few strangers have been
seen at the Sunday services,
apparently interested in seeing
and hearing the new preacher.

It is possible the present menu
of a dumbed down Catholic mass
is as much Christianity that the
unchurched will accept.

My advice to the rector was
simply, "Tend your flock."
Her concern for the people
is the best draw for new members.

Abortion

There is no social issue
more divisive nor impossible
to resolve than the termination
of life at its earliest stages.

Society once tried and failed
to extinguish abortion by law,
resulting in the killing of young
mothers in slaughterhouses.

Adherents of "pro-life" tactics
call again for forbidding
abortion under any circumstances
without means of enforcement.

The opposing "pro-choice"
calls for acceptance up to the
time a fetus could be delivered
as a viable human being.

The downside of unlimited
abortion results in the procedure
being used as sex selection, and
elimination of defective babies.

But when we deplore the horrendous
condition of Zika-affected babies,
and the products of rape or incest,
we question absolute prohibition.

There is, then, no acceptable
middle ground which society
can accept other than modest
prohibition of late term abortions.

From a religious standpoint,
theologians have not succeeded
in relating scripture to abortion,
other than calling it murder.

We suggest that those who are
opposed to abortion in principle
or religious belief, adopt one or
more unwanted babies per year.

Death of PECUSA (2)

Once there was a church in this country
which was born in 1789, lasted 190 years,
and was destroyed in a series of
conventions by selected participants.

The name of the church was "The
Protestant Episcopal Church in the U.S.A"
which was the publisher of the 1928
Book of Common Prayer.

But when a revision of the book
was issued in 1979, the frontispiece
proclaimed that it was according to the
use of "The Episcopal Church."

That signaled the end of Protestantism in the
U.S. province of the Anglican Communion,
and the beginning of an imitation of
Roman Catholicism in rites and identity.

Whereas Episcopal ministers were formerly
addresses as Mister, as in Jane Austen's books,
they became Fathers in clerical collars
and vestments of papal provenance.

Instead of Morning Prayer as the Sunday service,
a revised version of Holy Communion was
required, which has not a dime's worth of
difference with a Roman Catholic mass.

The trigger for the death of PECUSA, as it
was formerly and familiarly known, was an
aborted attempt to obtain formal recognition
of Anglican rites by the Vatican.

This actually happened, long after Pope
John Paul II stopped the dialogue.
The Vatican now permits the use of
Anglican rites by its converted clergy.

Despite serious doctrinal differences,
all Anglican and Episcopal churches
are now firmly and definitively Roman
Catholic in worship services.

In turn, the Catholics in the U.S.A. have
abandoned requirements that were
unpalatable, such as phone booth confessions
and forbidden use of contraceptives.

Meanwhile, the memory of Morning Prayer
lingers only in the minds of very old
worshippers, with its glorious language
and sung psalms and canticles.

A People's History of Christianity

Customer Review

78 of 104 people found the following review helpful

1.0 out of 5 stars

 Finding the sensitive'n'inclusive elite, March 12, 2013

By Namyriah

This review is from: A People's History of Christianity: The Other Side of the Story (Paperback)
Whatever this book is, it is not boring. Page after page you find an interesting mix of facts, personal anecdotes, and "spun" history. She must have intended the book for readers who know absolutely nothing about Christian history and would believe anything. I am not one of those readers.

Right away, we discover the book is fact-challenged. "Early commentators scarcely attacked Christian doctrines" (p 27). She never heard of Celsus, or the many other pagan critics who mocked Christian doctrine, not to mention the many Jewish critics? She is trying to make the case that "good" Christians never took doctrine seriously, but were focused on living the faith, while in fact the early Christians took both doctrine and morality seriously. She claims the name "Christian" means "little Christ" (p 35), a "fact" not mentioned by any other writer, ever. She writes lovingly of the early theologian Origen, who insisted on interpreting the Bible allegorically, not literally, and, as she repeatedly reminds the reader, anyone who reads the Bible literally is a fool. She praises the preacher John Chrysostom because she claims he saw "private property" as the root of all evils. She praises Martin of Tours because he gave up being a soldier and became a pacifist. Since early Christians called themselves "strangers" and "aliens," she insists that American Christians ought to encourage illegal immigration (p 75).

Notice a pattern? The real saints of the past were just like liberal Christians of today - like the author!

Her treatment of the Crusades is woefully inaccurate. "Christians and Muslims competed for both converts and territory on the battlefield" (p 123). Wrong! The two religions NEVER competed for converts. The Muslims advanced westward from their base in Arabia, conquered huge chunks of what had been the Christian Roman empire, and reduced the Christians to second-class citizenship - conquest, not conversion, was the goal. The Crusades were an attempt - violent, true - to recapture some of the land the Muslims had taken violently. The "hideous and inexcusable violence of the Crusades" was, she says, all the fault of Christians - never mentioning that the Crusades would never have occurred had Christian lands not been conquered by Muslims.

In this book, Muslims can do no wrong. She claims they lived alongside Jews and Christians in medieval Spain and got along harmoniously - well, it was "harmony" at the end of a sword, and Jews and Christians were heavily taxed to support the Muslim ruling class.

"Women could be burned as witches for inheriting their father's property or healing a sick child with herbs" (p 199). This "fact" about herbal healing was gleaned from The Da Vinci Code - a work of FICTION, but amazing how many Christian authors quote it like an encyclopedia.

According to her, Martin Luther taught that "a person must be free from the church or any authority telling him or her how to behave" (p 182). Absolutely untrue. Luther saw the Bible (which, Luther read literally, NOT allegorically) as the supreme authority for the Christian's life. After the Reformation, "Protestant women started to point out the inconsistency of male pastors proclaiming spiritual liberty from Roman Catholicism, yet still condemning women to silence in church" (p 253). She doesn't cite these women's writings because they don't exist - never did. And what exactly is the "inconsistency" she speaks of? The Protestants didn't break away from Catholicism over the issue of women clergy.

Pages 276-277, she raves about the World Parliament of Religions in Chicago in 1893, particularly Swami Vivekananda, the Hindu "holy man" who made such an impression. She talks as if the Parliament was some kind of sacred breakthrough in Christian history, when in fact the people swooning over the swami were just a handful of upper-class women who dabbled in exotic religions as a hobby and were as likely to change religions as they were to change wardrobes.

When she gets to the past twenty years, her biases become crystal clear. Page 132, she blames Bush's decision to go to war in Iraq on evangelical leaders - as if Bush was a mere puppet. A sensitive friend tells her that Jerry Falwell said that "according to the Bible, the punishment for homosexuality was death by stoning" (294). Possibly true, but unless Falwell said "I approve doing that today" (he didn't), so what? She attacks James Dobson for criticizing a speech in which Obama took a slap at Christians by asking which Bible verses they took seriously--the Sermon on the Mount or Leviticus' law against eating shellfish. Page 293, she lists some of the big names in 20th century Christianity, but with the exception of C. S. Lewis, none would remotely fit the "conservative" category. (She conveniently overlooks the fact that Lewis did not share her disdain for doctrine - quite the contrary! Also, Lewis hated trendiness and adamantly opposed the ordination of women.) Did she think Billy Graham was a non-entity? She has made it clear that she dislikes Christians who try to convert others, but she couldn't even acknowledge that Graham's organization has many charitable ministries. She never once credits evangelicals or charismatics with doing anything - except oppressing women and minorities. She is the angry ex-evangelical distancing herself from conservative Christians, with that syrupy smirk that has become her trademark.

The cherry-picking and spinning of data is one problem. Bad writing is another. For example: "Enacting love was a critical aspect of experiencing love" (p 60). "A fractured vision of the cosmos leads to hopelessness and withdrawal from God's world; a connected vision empowers change" (p 132). "Far from excluding God from the world, a progressive vision invites God in" (p 270). (As if you could keep him out!) "Modernity came to a frightening end when the United States exploded two atomic bombs over Japan" (p 279). (How did that "end" modernity? Did people stop driving cars after that?) "Honoring the body signals human connection with God through Christ" (p 39). "Medieval marriage existed for the procreation of children" (p 189). (Medieval husbands and wives didn't ENJOY sex?) "Nature has become a stranger to us" (p 305). (How? We no longer breathe air?) "Unless you are human, Christianity is a pretty bad deal" (p 136).

While a student at Gordon-Conwell Seminary (evangelical) she had to "sneak" down to liberal Harvard Divinity School to see the gay Catholic writer Henri Nouwen. Did Gordon-Conwell have jackbooted thugs keeping an eye on students? The people in Nouwen's audiences were "black and white, male and female, rich and poor, liberal and conservative, gay and straight." How, pray tell, did she know by looking that any were liberal, conservative, gay, or straight? And obviously there were women at Gordon-Conwell, since she was there. Under Nouwen's spell, she learned that doctrine was unimportant, only that "faith and compassion came to the fore" (p 287). "We came together: all the diverse people in that room actually created a spiritual community" (287). How? Did the people ever see each other again afterward? For her "community" meant "we all felt good about being there."

To her, the existence of so many denominations is nothing but evidence of "bitter arguments between Christians over the basic tenets of their faith" (p 289). For someone who constantly harps on "diversity," she doesn't seem comfortable with a divided Christianity (and given the decline of her own denomination, the Episcopalians, in all her books she takes a lot of shots at evangelical churches, which are growing, often because they flee the liberal churches like hers).

The author assures us that, in the modern world, we can't believe in heaven. Everything Jesus taught about the "kingdom of heaven" in fact applies to social change, not the afterlife. She admits her faith, such as it is, is entirely this-worldly, and that politics is the only way to bring about salvation.

The book, supposedly a history, is also autobiography. "I taught at a Christian college." "I was speaking in Vancouver, British Columbia." "I first visited Chartres Cathedral." "I went to Duke Chapel." "In 1996 I covered the Republican National Convention." "In 1980 I attended a mission conference in Edinburgh, Scotland." And on and on. If this author ever writes her autobiography, it will probably be ten volumes. Her self-absorption explains why in the book she only looks at Christians who remind her of her own wonderful self. (When a liberal insists that "we need to read different perspectives," what she means is "people who think just like I do."

My favorite quote: "My history is not neat." True. Much of it is not even fact. When your goal is to heap praise on people like your own adorable self, facts become negotiable. The proper Bible verse to serve as this book's epigraph is from Jesus' parable of the tax collector and the Pharisee, in which the self-congratulating Pharisee says, "God, I thank thee that I am not like other men."

Jesus Seminar

Recently we attended an Episcopalian service, wherein the preacher
proclaimed that Dominic Crossan was her favorite historian. That
reminded us that Crossan and Marcus Borg were pillars of the
Jesus Seminar, which attempted to reach a consensus among
scholars on the truth of the happenings recorded in the Gospels.
The movement was discontinued in 2006 but lives on in the writings
of its principals. 

From Wikipedia:

"In 1998 the Jesus Seminar published The Acts of Jesus: The Search
for the Authentic Deeds of Jesus. To create the material for this book,
they voted on the individual acts of Jesus as recorded in the gospels,
much as they'd previously voted on the individual sayings attributed to him..

According to the Jesus Seminar:

Jesus of Nazareth was born during the reign of Herod the Great.

His mother's name was Mary, and he had a human father whose
name may not have been Joseph.

Jesus was born in Nazareth, not in Bethlehem.

Jesus was an itinerant sage who shared meals with social outcasts.

Jesus practiced faith healing without the use of ancient medicine or
magic, relieving afflictions we now consider psychosomatic.

He did not walk on water, feed the multitude with loaves and fishes,
change water into wine or raise Lazarus from the dead.

Jesus was arrested in Jerusalem and crucified by the Romans.

He was executed as a public nuisance, not for claiming to be the Son of God.

The empty tomb is a fiction – Jesus was not raised bodily from the dead.
Belief in the resurrection is based on the visionary experiences of Paul,
Peter, and Mary Magdalene."

Doctrine

Doctrine

We are in possession of a small paperback entitled:
"C.S. Lewis, Christian Reunion and Other Essays,
Edited and with a preface by Walter Hooper, 1990"

Hooper is the long time custodian of Lewis's works,
and was his amanuensis in 1963, the year he died.
Hooper describes the first essay in the book,
written in 1944 as a result of Lewis's radio
broadcasts, to someone who was interested in
possible reconciliation between Canterbury
and Rome.

As Hooper recounts in his preface. it was the
only piece Lewis wrote on the subject of
Christian reunion, and was never published.
Hooper then goes on to describe the efforts
of a joint commission from 1970 to 1987,
which was killed by Pope John Paul II in 1989.

"The difficulty that remains, and which becomes.
sharper as it becomes narrower, is our disagreement
about the seat and nature of doctrinal Authority.
The real reason, I take it, why you cannot be in
communion with us is not your disagreement
with this or that particular Protestant doctrine,
so much as the absence of any real 'Doctrine',
in your sense of the word, at all.  It is, you feel
like asking a man to say he agrees not with a
speaker but with a debating society.

And the real reason why I cannot be in
communion with you is not my disagreement
with this or that Roman doctrine, but that to
accept your Church means, not to accept a
give body of doctrine, but to accept in
advance any Doctrine your Church hereafter
produces.  It is like being asked to agree not
only what a man has said but to what he­­­'s
going to say."

So we Anglicans (and Episcopalians) have
the Thirty-nine Articles of Faith, which we
do not rewrite, but cheerfully reinterpret.
Whereas the RCs simply abandon doctrines
that no longer work, even if the popes had
promulgated them as the direct word of God.

Doctrine

We are in possession of a small paperback entitled:
"C.S. Lewis, Christian Reunion and Other Essays,
Edited and with a preface by Walter Hooper, 1990"

Hooper is the long time custodian of Lewis's works,
and was his amanuensis in 1963, the year he died.
Hooper describes the first essay in the book,
written in 1944 as a result of Lewis's radio
broadcasts, to someone who was interested in
possible reconciliation between Canterbury
and Rome.

As Hooper recounts in his preface. it was the
only piece Lewis wrote on the subject of
Christian reunion, and was never published.
Hooper then goes on to describe the efforts
of a joint commission from 1970 to 1987,
which was killed by Pope John Paul II in 1989.

"The difficulty that remains, and which becomes.
sharper as it becomes narrower, is our disagreement
about the seat and nature of doctrinal Authority.
The real reason, I take it, why you cannot be in
communion with us is not your disagreement
with this or that particular Protestant doctrine,
so much as the absence of any real 'Doctrine',
in your sense of the word, at all.  It is, you feel,
like asking a man to say he agrees not with a
speaker but with a debating society.

And the real reason why I cannot be in
communion with you is not my disagreement
with this or that Roman doctrine, but that to
accept your Church means, not to accept a
given body of doctrine, but to accept in
advance any Doctrine your Church hereafter
produces.  It is like being asked to agree not
only what a man has said but to what he­­­'s
going to say."

C.S. Lewis

So we Anglicans (and Episcopalians) have
the Thirty-nine Articles of Faith, which we
do not rewrite, but cheerfully reinterpret.
Whereas the RCs simply abandon doctrines
that no longer work, even if the popes had
promulgated them as the direct word of God.

Fancy Clothes

Members and followers of Anglican Evangelicals
may have noticed reference to, and sometimes
postings from, a variety of independent churches
describing themselves as Anglican or Episcopal.

None of these are in the Anglican Communion,
nor are they in fellowship with one another,
except belonging to a loose-knit federation
that doesn't meet or accomplish anything.

They should all be considered Anglo-Catholic,
inasmuch as their worship service, Holy Eucharist,
is very similar to a Catholic mass, in which
only priests in clerical collars officiate.

The reform strain, or low church worship of
Anglicanism seems to have vanished, gone
since the aborted attempt by the Anglican
Communion to achieve recognition by the Vatican.

These little independent sects sponsor a
hierarchy that rivals the Vatican in titles.
Many bishops are consecrated; often
all their parish clerical heads are bishops.

What really distinguishes the Anglican churches
are the fancy clothes that clergy like to wear.
Some of these outfits rival the flowing robes
once worn by the early bishops.

All the priests are called Father.
Ordination of women is not permitted as a
practice of most independent Anglican groups.
A few may be found in free Episcopal churches.

The guiding principles of the independents
are adherence to the traditional orthodoxy of
the Thirty-nine Articles of Faith, and
rejection of the heresies of The Episcopal Church.

Caught in  the maelstrom of contemporary culture,
independent Anglican and Episcopal churches
may have to give up their local quirks and
find in unity the strength to survive.

LGBTQI Rights

We were asked what our
position was on rights of
LGBTQI persons in our church
and on society in general.

Our immediate response was that
we had no position on their rights.
All persons are God’s children and
therefore have the same rights as all.

Well, does your church recognize
the rights of same-sex persons to
marry each other, as approved by
The Supreme Court?

The only marriage that our church
blesses is that of man and woman,
as stated in holy scripture and
in our traditional practice.

We do not marry people,
people marry each other in
the sight of God which we
call upon Him to bless.

Regardless of society’s mandates
we cannot contravene that which
we believe to please those who
disagree with Christian doctrine.

We welcome all persons to  worship
with others, participate in the liturgy,
repent their sins, and give thanks
for His blessings in this life..

We make no special demands on
our parishioners other than to follow
Jesus in the best way they know,
and to love and respect one another.

Anglican Civil War

There is a civil war between the Anglican Church in North America and The Episcopal Church (formerly the Protestant Episcopal Church in the U.S.A.) It is not the widespread war that figured in the departure of five dioceses and sixty parishes. Almost all the litigation has been settled, mostly in favor of remnant groups who were awarded the assets, property and funds, of the so-called "breakaway" congregations. A few skirmishes languish in the courts, as described by the Anglican Curmudgeon in his blog.

The war is now at the top level. The Archbishop of ACNA was recognized at the January meeting of Anglican primates as head of something. So was the Presiding Bishop of TEC, who is not actually equivalent to a primate in authority and responsibility. They represent the worst fear of the former Archbishop of Canterbury: Two rival Anglican churches in the U.S. While both the esteemed clergymen have made no mention of their rivals, it is obvious that one church is growing and the other is declining.

History of religious denominations in the the U.S. is full of splits over doctrine, liturgy, or practice, It is not a situation where "Dodge ain't big enough for both of us!" The same schism is evident in the Anglican Communion, in the metamorphosis of GAFCON to a communion de facto of traditional Anglicans. We support the leaders of ACNA and GAFCON, while mourning the fall from grace of our formerly beloved church . We accept that the battle for supremacy will probably last for generations.

Christian Apologetics

Christian Apologetics is a genre of publications which explain
and promote the religion of Jesus Christ.  There are so many
as to take up a large section of Christian book catalogs.  A
few have become best-sellers on secular book lists.  Others
have found fertile distribution over the years.

A popular subcategory starts from the premise of what
following God can do for you.  We prefer those which tell
you what you should do for God.  Reading any of the books
listed below will not make you better or happier.  They will
transform you into a servant of God.

Mere Christianity, C.S. Lewis
The famous reworking of Lewis's lectures over the BBC
during World War II.   There are hundreds of printings in
various formats and anthologies.  The only surviving tape
of one talk may be found and downloaded from You Tube.

Basic Christianity, John Stott
A primer by the famous Anglican Evangelical, originally
published in 1958, then revised by the author in 2008.
The cover contains a note that 25 million copies have been
sold over the years.

Questions of Life, Nicky Gumbel
A handy manual that reproduces the video sessions that
the author gave in the Alpha Course, which swept churches
in the U.S.

The Reason for God, Timothy Keller
A New York Times best-seller, based on his sermons and
teaching at Redeemer Presbyterian Church in Manhattan.
Most suitable for young, educated inquirers, which were
his audience.

Simply Christian, N.T. Wright
This prolific English author's worthy successor to Mere
Christianity, subtitled "Why Christianity Makes Sense."

The Creed,  Luke Timothy Johnson
"What Christians Believe and Why it Matters" is an
approach to understanding the Christian faith by
expanding the Nicene Creed, which worshipers recite
every Sunday in church.

Doctrine, Mark Driscoll & Gerry Breshears
An evangelist and a theologian combine to provide the
more experienced Christian with a deeper understanding
of "What Christians Should Believe."

The Searchers, Joseph Loconte
A charming and poignant story of  those who are
looking for godly love in all the wrong places.
He advocates meeting them where they are and
leading them to see the light that Christ offers.

The Challenge of Jesus, N.T.Wright
Answers definitively who Jesus was and why He did
what He did. The quest for historical Jesus ends at
the Palestinian world of the first century.

Anglican Theology, Mark Chapman
A thorough history of the individuality and
inventiveness that created a workable theology
for Anglicans.

Theology Questions Everyone Asks
Answers by academics in plain terms to
questions about God and what matters most
in life.  When we ask those questions,
we are asking about theology

Becoming a Contagious Christian,
Bill Hybels and Mark Mittelberg believe that
effectively communicating our faith in Christ
should be the most natural thing in the world.
We just need encouragement and direction.

Death of PECUSA

The Protestant Episcopal Church in the U.S.A.
died a slow death over many years
which would take a team of scholars 
to trace through archives to record.

It will probably never be done
because its successor denomination 
is a failure and is itself suffering
a terminal decline in membership.

No one who participated in the downfall
wishes to take the blame, thus proving
that success has a thousand fathers
whereas failure is an orphan.

It is all too easy to blame acceptance
of homosexual clergy and women's
ordination as sole factors, but dry
rot preceded these developments.

The trigger event was an attempt
by the church leaders to seek a 
rapprochement with the Vatican
by becoming catholic in practice.

The tradition of morning prayer
as the principal Sunday service
was replaced by a mandate to 
schedule only Holy Eucharist.

Instead of calling the clergy,
ministers, and Mr. So and So,
they were now to be priests
and referred to as Father.

The familiar costume of cassock,
surplice, and academic hood,
was universally replaced with
the alb, stole, or vestment.

Totally lost in outward change
was the reform strain of Anglicanism.
The moral code was no longer 
preached nor taught in church school.

Eventually, Episcopal church services 
became therapeutic sessions 
emphasizing God's love 
with no price to pay in return.

One need not go to church 
to feel good about oneself,
which makes attending and
joining a church irrelevant.

Church Marketing

To some, the idea of church marketing
is a dirty concept, rooted in secularism.
To St.Paul, it was a necessity to market
the gospel to the heathen and all.

He did it by going into the streets
like a town crier announcing the news,
by making converts among the rich
who had influence in their communities.

Rick Warren started his Saddleback church
by knocking on the doors in his locale.
You can't just open the doors and 
expect people to find you, he said.

You have to emphasize community;
communal worship is the backbone
of every organized religion, because
it gives people another home.

They don't much care about theology
or whether your denomination is for
or against some social issue, they
just want to belong to a group.

They want to be told how to behave,
they want to be assured of God's love,
they want the strength to cope with
the vicissitudes of living.

Use the media to tell people that your 
church exists, that's all it's good for.
Most of it is free and responsive to
any kind of a good story.

Don't smother the furtive newcomers.
Greet them at the door, but give them
a chance to experience the services
for a while before signing them up.

The relationship will be cemented
when the newcomers find activities
that they feel comfortable with 
and enjoy doing in small groups.

They they become what we used
to call pillars of the church, and 
take part in the running and the
ownership of what is "their" church. 

Womens' Ordination

In an exchange of messages on the Facebook group, 
"Anglican Evangelicals," I was shocked to discover 
that refusal to ordain female clergy was still practiced 
by some Anglican quasi-denominations.

The antediluvian troglodytes of these sects
seem to enjoy dressing up in colorful vestments
and consecrating one another as bishops, but
they run what are strictly "boys' clubs."

There is nothing in scripture that forbids
women's ordination, setting aside Paul's 
admonitions to women to veil their heads
and keep their mouths shut while in church.

I wholeheartedly support the ordination
of women priests.  Especially, I admire
those brave women who left The Episcopal Church
to join the forces who follow the orthodox faith.

Therefore, I do not wish to have members
of our Facebook group whose identity is
primarily dependent upon keeping women
from their rightful place at the altar.

Where such is a matter of custom, I urge
them to change as soon as possible.  I also
suggest that Anglican catholics, pentecostals,
and fundamentalists find more compatible groups.

The Facebook group, "Anglican Evangelicals,"
is focussed on the Great Commission.
We are pleased to publish the news and events
of Anglicans who are in the front lines of evangelism.

Whether or not The Episcopal Church will be
replaced as the authentic voice of Anglicanism
in the U.S.A. depends upon the willingness 
of the orthodox faithful to present a united front.