Thanks for making this issue of the ATR available online. And I'm glad to know about this site. The more thought the better!

I note that the Anglican Theological Review gives space to writers with as wide a range of theological viewpoints as Radner and Charleston. Good for them.

Makes me wonder if the American Anglican Council would deign to have someone like Fr. Bill Carroll in the pages of *their* journal. Heck, I bet he couldn't even get a fraction of a column inch in my diocesan newspaper (Dallas :) I'd speculate that they're afraid of their members actually pondering other viewpoints. Could lure them away from the party line...

It is too bad that ATR doesn't have the intellectual integrity to live up to its claim to publish peer-reviewed aritcles.
For example in this edition the editors of the ATR let stand Harold Lewis bogus claim that Richard Hooker wrote, "Pray that none be offended if I make the Christian Religion an inn where all are to be received joyously rather than a cottage where a few friends of the family are to be received." Before Simeon wastes more unmerited praise on ATR and more mean spirited vitriol on the AAC, let the editors of ATR either produce proof that Hooker wrote this oft forged quote or else appologize for their part in assisting pseudo-scholars like Lewis in duping the readers of their journal. It does nothing to improve the intellectual reputation of other theological light weights like Barry Morgan to add their clueless parroting of a falsehood like this phony Hooker saying as "authoritative" evidence that the quote is genuinine.

Re the "Hooker" quote: it probably would have been much better to say something like "attributed to" and to have added a footnote to outline its relatively recent and unsourced appearance, and the strong likelihood that it is not an actual statement by Hooker.

But surely two things are evident:

1. It is in keeping with the spirit, if not the language, of Hooker. A more apt and authentic quotation to Lewis' ends might have been this from the Preface 9.3:

"Far more comfort it were for us (so small is the joy we take in these strifes) to labour under the same yoke, as men that look for the same eternal reward of their labours, to be joined with you in bands of indissoluble love and amity, to live as if our persons being many our souls were but one, rather than in such dismembered sort to spend our few and wretched days in a tedious prosecuting of wearisome contentions: the end whereof, if they have not some speedy end, will be heavy even on both sides. Brought already we are even to that estate which Gregory Nazianzen mournfully describeth, saying, 'My mind leadeth me' (since there is no other remedy) 'to fly and to convey myself into some corner out of sight, where I may scape from this cloudy tempest of maliciousness, whereby all parts are entered into a deadly war amongst themselves, and that little remnant of love which was, is now consumed to nothing. The only godliness we glory in, is to find out somewhat whereby we may judge others to be ungodly.'"

2. It is a fairly minor failure of attribution to earn such ire. I have seen many a scholar from the other side of the current divide misquote, misrepresent, or misattribute on matters far more serious than this. I recall one case in particular: a certain noted spokesman for the Global South (though not from the Global South originally) once accused a leading Anglican theologian of heresy on the basis of what was an obvious typographic error in one of his books (easily seen as such on the basis of the very next sentence in the theologian's work, and from the book's index, which had the word spelled properly).

And whether it is vitriol or not, Simeon is probably quite correct to speculate on the unlikelihood that the AAC would publish such a mixed collection of essays. Do you have evidence to the contrary?