This ought to give Martyn and the people at Truro and The Falls Church pause, but I am sure it will not. The voting has been going on all week, and as one can see from Martyn Minns' comments on Akinola and gays in Nigeria, actual facts don't cut much ice there with him and his devotees. This is not new, either.

Truthfulness doesn't cut much ground among the reasserters. Given the presence of the Republican establishment among their congregants, VP Cheney and Attorney General Gonzales, it is clear that there is little respect for 'facts'. Didn't the same suspects lie to the American people (and the world community) about Saddam's possession of WMD in order to justify their pre-emptive war of aggression in order to "share God's gift of American democracy with the people of the Middle East"? Now they are in a state of denial about the bloodshed caused by the ill-advised American invasion of Iraq. "Stay the course," while thousands of innocent Iraqis are dying.

What is the fuss about?

Mary wrote “CANA is an authentic part of the Anglican Communion and *acknowledged* by the Primates and by Archbishop of Canterbury.”

She did not say ‘support’ or ‘branch’! ACNS confirms the acknowledgment in “(CANA) is, *to my knowledge*, a “mission” of the Church of Nigeria.” Are we still part of the Anglican Communion?

'... a "mission" of the church of Nigeria...'

Those are called "scare" quotes. They are used when the author wishes to use a term that others have used, but with which he has some reservations about its truthfulness or applicability.

The AMIA is similarly a "mission" of the province of Rwanda. Archbishop Carey commented on the consecration of Murphy and Rogers that he could not recognize their jurisdiction. Archbishop Williams has not been so blunt.

But don't plan on Martyn Minns being invited to Lambeth. He'll be cooling his heels with Chuck Murphy.

Just to set the record straight, to my knowledge VP Cheney does not go to Truro, Clarence Thomas has not gone for many years (didn't like the press knowing where he was going to be), Colin Powell went once for the concert of an African children's choir (the Watoto Children's Choir), and Attorney General Gonzales does not go to Truro, but to The Falls Church, the other church voting on leaving ECUSA, which has for some reason gotten less press, probably because it is obvious that they are a faithful church at whom no mud can be slung. Not to say Truro is less faithful, but more in the public eye, so an easier target.

The people accusing Truro of being enmeshed in the Republican party by saying Cheney and others go there just show their ignorance and how little they actually know of the situation. To my knowledge no one of particularly high government rank currently regularly attends Truro church. Only the standard government employs that a church in the suburbs of Washington, D.C. is going to get.

"Colin Powell went once [to Truro] for the concert of an African children's choir (the Watoto Children's Choir)"

He and his wife do regularly attend an Episcopal church that is very much in the moderate/progressive tradition that is central to the Episcopal Church in Virginia.

I am told that President Bush and his wife quite often attend St. John's, Lafayette Square, whose rector is far from conservative. They attend largely because of proximity, not because they are in sympathy with the rector's views.

It's not so much about where the pols sit as what they read, hear, mark, and inwardly digest. Or not.

"Just to set the record straight, to my knowledge VP Cheney does not go to Truro, Clarence Thomas has not gone for many years (didn't like the press knowing where he was going to be), Colin Powell went once for the concert of an African children's choir (the Watoto Children's Choir), and Attorney General Gonzales does not go to Truro, but to The Falls Church..."

Geez Louise, StAndTheolStud, that's damning w/ faint disclaimer: the local dogcatcher wouldn't be found at *my* local Episcopal church! :-0

*****

Good point, ruidh: I hadn't thought of that (that the ABC can decide who IS and who IS NOT a legit Anglican diocesan bishop, for the purpose of Lambeth invites)

StAndTheolStud, thank you for confirming that Attorney General Gonzales attends a secessionist church, to wit, Falls Church. Please note that in my comment above I didn't mention any of the secessionist churches in the Diocese of Virginia by name.

Surely it couldn't be plainer. CANA is not a separate entity within the Anglican Communion, but a part of the Church of Nigeria; just as the Convocation of American Churches in Europe is not a separate entity within the Anglican Communion, but a part of TEC. Did anybody claim anything different?

Canon Tunde's style is familiar to me now. He habitually makes comments (like his preface 'what is all the fuss about') which seem to me to make light of something which is devastatingly serious.

I'm not sure I understand Tunde's point. Who is the 'we' when he asks 'are we still a part of the Anglican Communion?'

Canon Kearon's statement seems clear to me. No, CANA is not part of the Anglican Communion in the same way that the Church of Nigeria or the Episcopal Church in the USA is part of the Anglican Communion. It is a "mission" of the Church of Nigeria. I note that Canon Kearon puts mission in quotes, suggesting that the status of CANA is indeed in question.

Are we still a part of the Anglican Communion is one question, to which the answer seems to be - not sure. Another question is, are they still Anglicans?

That's the question I've been asking in my mind of Chris Sugden and Paul Perkin since the publication of their 'covenant'. Are any of these people really Anglican in the way I understand the term? Are they faithfully committed to the Anglican Communion as a Christian body, with all its failings and weaknesses? Or are they determined to undermine it and set up an alternative church?

I would like to hear more from Canon Tunde. He has been sadly silent about the presence of growing numbers of LGBT Nigerian Anglicans as members of Changing Attitude Nigeria.

The strategy is indeed becoming clear across the Communion. Create alternative churches which they think will become a replacement for what they see as a church which has abandoned scriptural fundamentalism. Attack the presence of lesbian and gay people in the church. Undermine any church reports which reinforce the dignity and presence of LGBT Anglicans. Undermine the Archbishop of Canterbury and the authorities of the church - the instruments of unity. Adopt individualism as a policy - we are entitled to create our own leaders, training structures, parishes, churches, anything we like, when we deem the present Anglican churches to have erred.

So far the focus has been on the term 'mission'. But do not forget the later part of the statement where CANA is referred to as 'an organisation that relates to a single province of the Anglican Communion'.

This seems to suggest that CANA is recognized by the Secretariat as separate, but in communion with, the Church of Nigeria.

So no, to enter CANA is to leave the Anglican Communion, just like with the AMiA.

Colin - maybe it is your "strategy" which has become clear to people and is getting a public response in order to preserve the integrity of the CofE longer-term?