It is very useful to have chapter & verse like this. Thanks.

Much of it including subtle name changes, and slippages, puts me in mind of Animal Farm.

If ++Cantuar, +Dunelm and +Winchester acted in the best interests of the Anglican Communion, they would speak out against the border-crossings more forcefully rather than engage in such actions themselves, now with the so-called "Windsor bishops" gathering at Camp Allin in Texas in the presence of ++Cantuar's emissaries/commissaries - to wit, +Dunelm and +Winchester.

The present ++Cantuar has disgraced the legacy of ++Geoffrey Fisher, ++Michael Ramsey, ++Donald Coggan et al., and especially the legacy of the first Executive Officer of the Anglican Communion, +Stephen F. Bayne, Jr.

After initially approving the selection of Jeffrey John as Bishop of Reading, the present ++Cantuar turned against his one-time friend and co-founder of Affirming Catholicism, sacrificing him on the altar of expediency. Now ECUSA is the next sacrificial victim to appease the the great modern-day Donatist, ++Abuja and his cohorts.

Thank you for recalling Dromantine 15 and WR 115. When the folks who are so critical of TEC applaud those who are Dromantine or Windsor "compliant," surely they do not have these parts in mind. I am weary of their hypocrisy.

At the new CANA website referred to in an earlier posting, a map of the world appears with a handful of US cities named; among them New York City. There is no indication on this website (that I can find) giving a rationale for this listing of cities, nor for what New York has to do with Abuja (apart from Archbishop Akinola's honorary "chair" at the Cathedral Church of St John the Divine). Are there any CANA congregations in New York City (which spans two US dioceses: New York and Long Island)? Does anyone know?

Meanwhile, thanks to Simon for reminding all of us that such ventures as CANA do not have the approval of the ABofC (although he appears on the CANA website as an "affiliate" with a link to his own website. Does he know about this? )

You will be far better off without them - as I am!

I cannot let pass unchallenged the statement on the CANA website by Canon Minns that TEC "unilaterally sacked the former Nigerian chaplain" who had been appointed to look after Nigerian Anglican expats in the U.S., and that by this action had made the formation of CANA necessary. This is untrue. I know, because until my retirement the end of 2004, I was the Presiding Bishop's deputy for Anglican relations and responsible for oversight of TEC's share of the Nigerian Anglican chaplaincy jointly established by Bishop Griswold and Abp Akinola.

The truth is that the chaplain had overspent his budget and further expenses on his part were disallowed until income was sufficient. The chaplain chose to interpret this as a sacking, but he was clearly informed that he was not being terminated and that he could resume his work once sufficient funds were on hand. Abp Akinola was kept fully abreast of this development, but by this time (2004) I think he clearly had intended to cease cooperating in the joint chaplaincy and to establish CANA, although he never informed the Presiding Bishop of these plans.

For the record, tens of thousands of dollars were raised for the joint chaplaincy, with major grants coming from the dioceses of Southern Ohio and Texas. Numerous TEC bishops had indicated their support and facilitated the work of the former chaplain. Abp Akinola, for his part, pledged US$5,000 to the effort, but had not made good on his pledge by the time I departed the end of 2004.

Patrick Mauney

I think we can possibly rest assured that prohibited boundary crossings are as important to the conservatives as the Lambeth 1.10 1998 listening process has been. Alas. Now, of course, CANA comes out its own closets as a missionary effort of the real conservagive Anglicans against all the other believers who are definitively pronounced UN-Anglican in no uncertain terms.

I still do not think Rowan Williams will like being the first among these equals - especially if he continues to balk at unintelligent readings of scripture, and some other reading materials as well. Many conservative personal bests are yet to come as the schism unfolds - and surely there will eventually be endless rounds of self-congratulation among outside funders as their detonation of the worldwide Anglican bonds of affection proves again that power is much more important than love. Who could ever have imagined otherwise?

I foresee a great deal more of the principled dissents we are starting to see from various quarters across the spectrums as this pre-engineered split/realignment is brought to its own boiling points. Too many evangelical believers I know are really quite intelligent, and progressive in their own ways, so that there is only so much angry mileage to get out of beating the drums against the queer folks.

Quiet, please. The show has begun. You will not wish to miss one moment of the dialogue, intrigue, and occasional unwitting streams of Ambrose Biercian bon mots.

If Canterbury suddenly announces that it, alas, only can now - only barely - bring itself to recognize the conformed conservative crowds, and nobody else around the world, will that ultimately free us as we let those covenant police powers bear that ancient vision of Camelot / Canterbury away?

I am grateful to Patrick Mauney for clarifying this, from his own experience.

It is discouraging the way people seem to lie--but I guess that is a naive thing to say, knowing what we do about the way the mind functions around perception, memory and so on. So that misunderstandings lead to misinformation and everyone thinks they are right. Even so, I tend to think Peter Akinola seizes any moment, so that his power can be increased. --or do I just want to demonise him ? (That is, have a personal investment in demonising him), which would be unethical & far from ahimsa.

I saw Gotterdammerung the other day, and it threw a lot of light on all this twisted stuff, about 'facticity', motivation and love with integrity. I experienced as being applicable to 'individual psychology' and 'corporate dynamics' of instituions , groups and so.

Trouble is, I am still unsure I can (be sure to) avoid falling into Wotan's trap, myself.

If there is a crisis, it is a crisis of conscience and moral grounding in these characters who claim (but malign) orthodoxy.

Patrick Simon has started a new thread on funding (thanks for your posting).

My other contemplations of the last few days is that the only way this crisis could have been averted was to quietly submit to one faction imposing its theology across the alternative "unsuitable" elements under the broad tent of Anglicanism. Personally, that reeks a bit like the torturer telling you that it is your fault that you were burnt with the brand (when your choices were to be silent and be burnt with the brand, or speak and be burnt at the stake). Either way they were going to abuse you, the only thing that changed were the techniques and words used whilst they inflicted their abuse. Maybe that is why Jesus didn't cry out in the lead up to the crucifixion, nothing he said would have changed the outcome, it merely would have changed the form. (And for any Jews reading this posting, that was not a Jewish error, it was a human error the likes of which some would reinstate in a flash if they thought they could get away with it - and Klu Klux Klan did for many decades).

Fortunately, I see things such as the 24,000 attended 16th International AIDS conference in Toronto this week and give praise to God that the world is moving on. There have been clear calls bring more respect to women and children, acknowledge the vulnerables in the community in such a way that they co-operate with disease management (versus hiding their status so they are not killed as "beasts"), accepting the need for condoms, and Clinton gently chiding us not to dismiss the poor who have demonstrated in Africa an excellent uptake on strategies and medicines: when they are made available to them.

The world moves on and it will survive, but with no thanks to overly puritanical homophobic and/or misogynistic priestly thugs.

I am neither Anglican nor Episcopalian, and I do not belong to the Anglican Communion. However, I find myself, time and again, reading about the issues in the Anglican Communion.

It is just saddening to see the difficulties in the Anglican Communion. I just wish that the brothers and sisters in faith in the Communion would abandon the unhelpful bickering that is going on and fall on their knees in prayers and supplications that that heartfelt prayers of Jesus may come to fulfillment: "Father that they may be one." If only we can just remember the words of the psalmist: "How lovely it is when the brethren dwell in unity" and perhaps,that envious praise that was gained by our forebears in the faith: "See how they love themselves!" a different approach may be taken in this disagreement that grows even more sour by the day. Brethren, this is not the time for finger pointing. I urge thee, please, pray, pray, and pray for your beloved Communion.

The Anglican Communion seems to be ignoring the authority of the holy scripture hence, many of our provinces and dioceses are desecrated and beset with multifarious kinds of sins. Many of our sanctuaries no longer provide the spiritual umbrella that it used to guarantee. Holiness and devotion to things of God have left.The daughters of Jezebel and Delilah have gained entrance to the church, they are all around the altars of God, parading themselves as Presiding Bishops, Archbishops and Bishops.The household of Achan have found their way back to the church of God. The Ananias and Sapphiras have been exalted. Evangelism is secondary or just for formality. Jesus warned us to "Beware of false Prophets who come to us in sheep's clothing, but inwardly, they are ravening wolves"(Matthew 7:15). I am grateful to God that He is Using Archbishop Akinola of Nigeria to restore sanity and sanctity into God's own sanctuary in this age.

I assure you, respect for the authority of Holy Scripture has left the Anglican Communion. What has left is the respect once accorded fellow Anglicans to prayerfully respond to the call of Scripture in their own time and place. Archbishop Akinola knows nothing about the chruch and its people in the United States. As a result, he can bring no sanity. He can only interfere. Judgement on the sanctity of the church in America is not his to wield.

I am a sinner saved by faith in Jesus Christ. I became a member of TEC about 10 years ago because I am moved by its formal liturgy in the BCP and because I believed that the services in the BCP faithfully followed the holy scriptures. However, recently I noticed that slowly some TEC parishes stopped using the BCP service, substituting an abbreviated version in the weekly bulletin. In particular, I noticed that the confession of sin and repentance section always seemed to be missing, as if we are no longer sinners?

Then the consecration of the homosexual bishop shocked me. Now I read newly appointed bishop Martyn Minns recent sermon "Can't we just get along?", and I began to fully understand what was bothering me. Bishop Minns points out that the homosexual bishop is just the tip of a doctrinal iceberg. He suggests that TEC has abandoned the traditional Christian faith and doctrine contained in the holy scriptures for a rationalist, secular anti-faith that I, and apparently many other Christians in TEC, find unacceptable and cannot live with.

This is not an ecclesiastical power-play issue. In the history of the church of Jesus Christ, rationalism is a relatively new heresy. But just thinking it is so will not make me a non-sinner, remove my need of the salvation offered by Jesus, nor, if you believe the gospels, will it remove that need for any other man or woman.

The catty comments of some posters above I find an insult to my faith. But they are forgiven. I just wanted to point out that the crisis of faith in TEC will not be solved by insulting, catty comments.