The George Conger article ends "The Lambeth Conference organizing committee stated it had not sent the letters, and suggested it might have been a hoax to create further mischief in the run up to the summer gathering."

Considering some of the players and the inconsistency in the correspondence, that's likely. Remember there are some who simply love to bicker and cause mischief.

Isaiah 57:20-21 "...the wicked are like the tossing sea, which cannot rest, whose waves cast up mire and mud. “There is no peace,” says my God, “for the wicked.”'

Jeremiah 18:18-20 “They said, “Come, let’s make plans against Jeremiah; for the teaching of the law by the priest will not be lost, nor will counsel from the wise, nor the word from the prophets. So come, let’s attack him with our tongues and pay no attention to anything he says.” Listen to me, O LORD; hear what my accusers are saying! Should good be repaid with evil? Yet they have dug a pit for me. Remember that I stood before you and spoke in their behalf to turn your wrath away from them.”

Isaiah 32:14-17 "The fortress will be abandoned, the noisy city deserted; citadel and watchtower will become a wasteland forever, the delight of donkeys, a pasture for flocks, till the Spirit is poured upon us from on high, and the desert becomes a fertile field, and the fertile field seems like a forest. Justice will dwell in the desert and righteousness live in the fertile field. The fruit of righteousness will be peace; the effect of righteousness will be quietness and confidence forever."

Micah 4:8 "As for you, O watchtower of the flock, O stronghold of the Daughter of Zion, the former dominion will be restored..."

Nehemiah 4:7-9 "But when… the men… heard that the repairs to Jerusalem’s walls had gone ahead and that the gaps were being closed, they were very angry. They all plotted together to come and fight against Jerusalem and stir up trouble against it. But we prayed to our God and posted a guard day and night to meet this threat."

Bishop Robinson can feel justified by not contributing to the carbon footprint emitted by the Lambeth Conference. The programme on Saturday 26 July is 'Safeguarding Creation: the bishop and the environment'. Not flying half way round the world might set a good example.

Many are chosen. Few are called.

The difference between "+"Minns and +Robinson is that only one of them was consecrated according to the proper procedures of TEC. Minns is an episcopus vagans posing as a bishop of the Anglican Communion: there've been plenty like him before (some of us do remember a bit of Anglo-Catholic history) and there will, no doubt, be plenty like him in the future. He is bishop of no diocese, and his consecration was an explicitly schismatic act. For what it's worth, I would assert that he is a false shepherd: the whole premise of his consecration was to lead people out of TEC. He doesn't even have the saving grace of being some ritualistic exotic bird.

+Robinson, on the other hand, IS a diocesan bishop, IS a bishop in good standing in his province (in spite of anything some might say) and IS entitled to be invited to the Lambeth Conference.

Just because some people say they are bishops of the Anglican Communion doesn't make them magically so. The conservatives should remember that polity comes before politics; isn't that what Lambeth is about?

I think that the response of New Hampshire Episcopalians is probably something along the lines of:

"Well, of all the nerve!"

While reading about either dirty trick or carelessness in the Lambeth run-up is fun, try reading the excerpts from an article by former TEC PB Griswold's daughter about her interview with Akinola. It can be found at Father Jake's Blog.

_there've been plenty like him before (some of us do remember a bit of Anglo-Catholic history)_

Well, actually, I wouldn't so compare Martyn Minns. I have a lot of time for some episcopi vagantes, and the Anglican history of such as Arnold Harris Mathew and Ulric Vernon Herford and after is rather biased to say the least. Some here might just find that some of the roads taken by Liberal Catholicism have more to suggest positively than just the activities of some sorts of odd bods.

Martyn Minns can be understood purely as an internal Anglican matter, prior to attempting a schism.

Yes Counterlight. But who's nerve is it?

Lambeth, who deny sending the letters?

Or the scallywags who actually did send the letters?

At the end of the day there's at least one camp of deceivers. Either Lambeth issue things and then deny that they do it. Or somebody else issues things and purports to be Lambeth when they are not.

Follow up to my comment regarding this comment:

_there've been plenty like him before (some of us do remember a bit of Anglo-Catholic history)_

Some may like to evaluate what they make of this:

http://www.independentoldcatholic.org/libcathtoday.html