Comments: more American news

Don't you get it KSJ?

Akinola doesn't consider TEC to be part of the church catholic.

Posted by Troy at Saturday, 28 April 2007 at 8:32pm BST

For Archbishop Akinola isn't the question of jurisdiction secondary to his perception of Biblical truth?

Posted by Awdry Ely at Saturday, 28 April 2007 at 10:58pm BST

Troy

KJS does.

Women are told we should not struggle when we are being raped, as that means we are more likely to be more seriously hurt by our molesters. But there are serial molesters who will hurt you, regardless of whether you struggle or not. At least this way they can't claim that you consented or enjoyed the experience.

Posted by Cheryl Clough at Saturday, 28 April 2007 at 11:14pm BST

Its not his right to make that decision. Whether he likes it or not, it remains the official Anglican presence in the USA, and what Akinola is doing is flagrantly opposed to Windsor. Still, no surprise there.

Posted by Merseymike at Saturday, 28 April 2007 at 11:28pm BST

So Akinola does not think a great deal to the communiqué which he spent so much time, along with his visitors, to push in his direction. So we can regard this as pretty dead now, which it is anyway, and Akinola will be busy developing schism and dissonance whilst Rowan Williams wishes to listen.

Akinola's actions outside his area could lead to an Anglican Communion that will not recognise Nigeria and a few others doing the same. Similarly Nigeria and the few, as its own form of invasive Anglican Communion, will end up not recognising the Anglican Communion as it stands. And then perhaps this one can get on being more inclusive and progressive as a whole.

Posted by Pluralist at Saturday, 28 April 2007 at 11:40pm BST

Peter, the egomanic of Abuja, is a "law unto himself." The reasserters are nothing but cherry-pickers with regard to Holy Scripture and the canons of the Church. Give them enough rope and they are bound to hang themselves. All we can do is pray for them.

PB Katharine Schori is doing the Christian thing, trying to reach out to him.

Posted by John Henry at Saturday, 28 April 2007 at 11:59pm BST

As I'm not Anglican or Episcopalian I may be wrong in understanding there are Episcopal churches in countries in Europe and Latin America which also have other Anglican congregations, so why can't there be more than one Anglican church in America? I've heard that TEC is in 17 countries, is it the only Anglican presence in those countries? And if not, what's the difference between having different branches in those countries and having more than one branch in the US? Seems the easiest way to solve the current impass.

Posted by Nonanglican at Sunday, 29 April 2007 at 12:01am BST

Presiding Bishop Katharine is magnanimous. This action by Akinola is a brutal rejection of Anglicanism: it is vile fundamentalism at its core. It places homophobic doctrine above all else to shore up core support.

At least one thing is clear - the Dar Es Salaam communique is torn to shreds. That's something to be thankful for.

Freedom loving, justice-seeking Episcopalians and Anglicans worldwide, must unite and support TEC against this attack on our shared values. Appeasement will not do anymore. Time to stand up and be counted on this Good Shepherd Sunday.

Posted by Hugh of Lincoln at Sunday, 29 April 2007 at 1:18am BST

Interesting, notice that the ceremony is not being held at an Episcopal parish church. I believe the two breakaway parishes in the DC area probably could hold the number of expected "guests" at this consecration.

Like a spoiled and manipulative child, they know just how far to push legally and get attention.

Posted by choirboyfromhell at Sunday, 29 April 2007 at 2:05am BST

Lots of speculation in the blogsphere regarding the timing of the Akinola visit (he's coming to install Minns) with rumors that 5 network dioceses are leaving TEC next week. Anglican Centrist openly speculates they will join CANA, while Mark Harris infers it. ON the other hand, some think they may go over to the RCC. These are interesting times, indeed.

Posted by C.B. at Sunday, 29 April 2007 at 2:27am BST

I'm surprised and pleased that the conservatives are the minority that they are here in the states. They're an annoyance, but they aren't winning an exodus of the disgruntled. +Katharine's statement about them is exactly right.

Posted by Curtis at Sunday, 29 April 2007 at 3:52am BST

You know, this is pretty basic stuff, going back to Nicea. One bishop, one diocese. One primate, one province.

Will the ABC speak a word about this? Or is he too busy planning his next book and his vacation? Inquiring minds want to know.

Inquiring minds also want to know what he would say or do if ++Akinola decides to establish a similar venture in - GASP! - England?

Posted by Cynthia Gilliatt at Sunday, 29 April 2007 at 4:29am BST

Hugh - absolutely right. And where are those cowardly liberal Bishops whop should be speaking out loud and strong and who have been Trappist-like in their silence?

Posted by Merseymike at Sunday, 29 April 2007 at 10:33am BST

Cynthia asks: Inquiring minds also want to know what he would say or do if ++Akinola decides to establish a similar venture in - GASP! - England?

The most he could do would be to issue an inhibition. And what do you imagine the effect of that would be? (clue: it begins with z…)

Posted by cryptogram at Sunday, 29 April 2007 at 12:30pm BST

There is indeed an argument for more than one Anglican Church in each place - and it looks like it is going that way. It is also the implication of the failure of Rowan Williams' approach to Communion unity. It may well be that all those splinter Churches not in association with Canterbury will find themselves a network. The upshot is, to this, that those who have moderate and liberal views have their institutions too - and may need to develop as such. Even with Nigeria running around like some invading force, at least there is an identity with TEC and Canada and New Zealand and Scotland, etc. - the real problem is when indeed Akinola has contempt for England and starts sending his missionaries over here for sympathisers, and a Church which stretches each and every this and that way unravels.

Posted by Pluralist at Sunday, 29 April 2007 at 12:51pm BST

Nonanglican:

Good question, I suspect (but do not know for sure) that this may have been done for expatriates. In Paris there are both CofE and Episcopal parishes.

One thing though is clear, the leadership of these parallel parishes probably arrived at some acceptable agreement before establishing their respective presences. And the properties were a part of an existing Anglican denomination beforehand, which wasn't the case in Paris. This isn't true with in Virginia now however.

Any input would be welcomed, as I'm wondering how this can be also.

Posted by choirboyfromhell at Sunday, 29 April 2007 at 12:59pm BST

Let him come and draw under his wing all those who really think the rejection of gays is the most important article of faith. Once they feel safely free of gaydom they will probably discover that they can't agree on much else and will splinter on other lines. We will have multiple Anglican presences in NOrth America. That's not a disaster. The Amia and the continuum have not caused the sky to fall yet. It only remains to be seen which if any of us will still be talking to Canterbury in a year or two. All I hope.

On the whole Anglicanism is growing in America not as we planned for it but still growing in its weird and contentious variety. I do sometimes wish that Bp MInns would go back to England where he came from and trouble the C of E as a Bishop of Nigeria. Now THAT would be interesting.

Posted by dmitri at Sunday, 29 April 2007 at 1:07pm BST

I can see that Archbishop Akinola's action causes difficulties. It is important to articulate clearly disappoint at his actions - and I'm not sure the Presiding Bishop does that. However, I also have to say personally I'm uneasy with words like egomaniac, brutal and vile, being thrown around.

Posted by Awdry Ely at Sunday, 29 April 2007 at 2:16pm BST

On the bright side, this is a big step towards making a nonsense of demands that TEC be "Windsor Compliant"; on the downside, Windsor was only ever of use to these folks as a stick with which to beat those who they intended, in any case, to destroy, so where's the difference? Maybe to those branches of the Church that have hesitated thus far to openly support TEC for fear of accusations of "tearing the fabric".

Remind me again, who is it who's tearing at the fabric?

Posted by Lapinbizarre at Sunday, 29 April 2007 at 2:25pm BST

This latest move from Archbishop Akinola reveals ever more clearly what he wants. To be the leader of the Anglican Communion, with Papal powers to do what he likes when and where.

Posted by Jeff at Sunday, 29 April 2007 at 4:38pm BST

""Good question, I suspect (but do not know for sure) that this may have been done for expatriates. In Paris there are both CofE and Episcopal parishes."

Yes, these parishes are chaplaincies for expatriates. Bishop Whalon, suffragan bishop for the convocation of TEC parishes in Europe wrote a comment recently on TA discussing the arrangement.

This not at all the same thing as two provinces claiming to minister to the same territory while being out of communion with one another. See the last comment here http://www.thinkinganglicans.org.uk/archives/002169.html

Posted by ruidh at Sunday, 29 April 2007 at 4:38pm BST

His Grace Akinola is full of behind-the-scenes destructive religious nonsense and Tanzania and Virginia are NOT the only examples of his sneaky/pushy and despoticlike escapdes:

*Why spare England?
*Gay's Produce Hooligans!


http://frjakestopstheworld.blogspot.com/2005_09_01_archive.html


http://frjakestopstheworld.blogspot.com/2005/09/archbishop-akinola-gays-produce.html

Posted by Leonardo Ricardo at Sunday, 29 April 2007 at 9:04pm BST

KJS and the US church might want to take a leaf out of Castro's book.

If you want to leave, fine. Just don't take the established church's resources with you. If they have sufficient trust in God, they don't need human booty anyway, as God will provide for them.

The other good thing is that having clearly defined who their Jesus is and who is covered by their Jesus, we don't have to worry about it being the real Jesus. Their Lord is only interested in the salvation of their congregations, and is thus not the Lord promised to all the peoples of all the nations. (e.g. Micah 4:1-7, and Isaiah 43:18 to 44:11)

Posted by Cheryl Clough at Sunday, 29 April 2007 at 10:35pm BST

For John Henry Yes, +Akinola is a law unto himself. Unlike the pope, either de jure or de facto, he has absolute control over the entire episcopacy of Nigeria, and through it, its priests. Here is the oath that Nigerian bishops take:
"3. OATH OF OBEDIENCE
At his consecration or translation, every Bishop of the Church of Nigeria shall swear an oath of Canonical obedience to the Archbishop, Metropolitan and Primate of the Church of Nigeria and to his lawful successors."

Any bishop who acts or teaches or exegetes a text in a manner with which +Akinola disagrees can be canonically removed. There is no recourse. This is the type of authority that +Akinola is used to wielding. I realize that he did an MTS at Virginia Theo and was in the US at least part of the time, (His D.D. is honorary) but, why would anyone expect that he would feel differently about limiting his exercise of authority in the Communion. In 2005, any reference to the Archbishop of Canterbury was removed from the Church of Nigeria's Constitution.

Posted by EPH at Monday, 30 April 2007 at 12:55am BST

"If you want to leave, fine. Just don't take the established church's resources with you. If they have sufficient trust in God, they don't need human booty anyway, as God will provide for them."

The N. Va gang not only are trying to take the booty, but they are squatting in the property the Diocese of VA holds in trust for TEC. This is under litigation.

This is also probably why next Saturday's festivities will be held at a hired hall. I expect lawyers on both sides agreed to this.

Interestingly, there has so far been no story about this in the WPost - unless I missed it - entirely possible.

Posted by Cynthia Gilliatt at Monday, 30 April 2007 at 4:46am BST

Don't get your knickers in a twist, chaps!
I am sure ++Akinola has cleared the trip with the ABC.

The AC Primates are dealing with TEC and this trip is part of that process.

Posted by NP at Monday, 30 April 2007 at 7:07am BST

Oh, so the ABC doesn't believe in the Windsor report's recommendations either?

Posted by Merseymike at Monday, 30 April 2007 at 10:26am BST

"I am sure ++Akinola has cleared the trip with the ABC."

Based on what? The same source that assures you +Duncan of Pittsburgh has had dialogue with gay people? Besides, the Bishop of Canturbery hath no jurisdiction in that (well, that) realm of America.

Posted by Ford Elms at Monday, 30 April 2007 at 11:09am BST

Epifiz quoted the Nigerian canons:
"3. OATH OF OBEDIENCE
At his consecration or translation, every Bishop of the Church of Nigeria shall swear an oath of Canonical obedience to the Archbishop, Metropolitan and Primate of the Church of Nigeria and to his lawful successors."

As "the Archbishop, Metropolitan and Primate of the Church of Nigeria" at any point in Time refers to the present Archbishop, I wonder at "his lawful successors".

I believe "his lawful successors" generally refers to what is otherwise known as "the heirs of his body" ;=)

Shouldn't it read his "designated" successors?

Posted by Göran Koch-Swahne at Monday, 30 April 2007 at 11:28am BST

No Merseymike, TEC rejected TWR and now the AC is dealing with TEC - hoping for repentance before Sep 30th but taking steps to prepare for life after TEC walks away

Posted by NP at Monday, 30 April 2007 at 11:34am BST

NP -Really. What will you say when it becomes clear that it was NOT cleared with anyone? Akinola makes the ABC look like he's a fool's errand, and a fool for going on it. I would bet the Virginia church property the ABC did not "clear" this trip to install Minns. And let's see if any dioceses jump to CANA next week. But I supposed he "cleared" that with the ABC too!

Posted by C.B. at Monday, 30 April 2007 at 1:17pm BST

EPH: I have to point out that all D.D.'s are honourary degrees. It is one of the highest possible honours.

Cynthia: 'You know, this is pretty basic stuff, going back to Nicea. One bishop, one diocese. One primate, one province.'

Last time I was home I went to see Martyn and asked him this question directly. His response was quite simple. It is basic stuff, and in an ideal world, that's how it would be, but we don't live in an ideal world. He pointed out that the Peter Lee calls himself the bishop of Virginia even though there is a Roman Catholic Bishop down the street from him. That should not be. The Anglican Church of Canada is (I believe) in the process of creating a bishop only for indigenous peoples covering all diocese, despite these people group's request that this not be done. In other places there are several bishops covering the same territory for different people groups (for instance, in the south pacific, different bishops for indigenous peoples and white settlers). All these things should not be according the Nicea (most pertinently, the TEC and RCC bishops of Virginia), but they are. We do not live in an ideal world, and while causing further division is a grave thing, it is, in the eyes of ++Akinola, a necessary thing because of the perceived apostasy of TEC.

Posted by James Crocker at Monday, 30 April 2007 at 1:40pm BST

"The AC Primates are dealing with TEC and this trip is part of that process" NP

NP, please keep your witchcraft projecting chants to yourself...repeating your special "insights" won't work.

Posted by Leonardo Ricardo at Monday, 30 April 2007 at 4:22pm BST

James - It is quite clear what Akinola's rationale is for doing as he pleases. But oddly, the Tanzania Communique was utterly silent as to the apostasy of TEC. Rather, it focused only on TEC's teaching with respect to homosexuality. He seems to be able to decide for himself at any point whether another province is apostate, thus giving himself complete authority to abide or not abide by AC polity with respect to that province. I hope Minns made that clear and simple as well.

Posted by C.B. at Tuesday, 1 May 2007 at 1:50am BST

"Last time I was home I went to see Martyn and asked him this question directly. His response was quite simple. It is basic stuff, and in an ideal world, that's how it would be, but we don't live in an ideal world. He pointed out that the Peter Lee calls himself the bishop of Virginia even though there is a Roman Catholic Bishop down the street from him."

And if the RC Bishop of that diocese claimed to be the Anglican Presence in the US he would just as wrong as Akinola and others. Same if the bishops of the AME churches made the same claim. Same if the ministers on TV on Sunday morning who call themselves bishops claimed the same. Same if the LDS bishops claimed to be the real Anglican presence. All would be equally phoney.

Posted by Cynthia Gilliatt at Tuesday, 1 May 2007 at 2:00am BST

"The AC Primates are dealing with TEC and this trip is part of that process" NP

Perhaps NP believes this. Or, perhaps he/she has fallen for the propaganda put out by those trying to destroy any part of Anglicanism that differs from their narrowly contrived views.

“A lie told often enough becomes truth.” - Vladimir Lenin

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it." - Joseph Goebbels

The majority of the Church of England, ultimately, will not surrender to bullies and liars, regardless of the numbers of parishioners they claim to represent. Scotland, Wales, and Ireland will undoubtedly precede England in rejecting the fundamentalists who represent the very opposite of the historical Anglican Communion.

The ABC will ultimately understand that he can be the face of the Global South, actually led by the Primate of Nigeria, or the first among equals in the rest of the Anglican Communion.

My guess is that he is beginning to understand the dilemma which he has helped to create for himself, and did not count on having to deal with people who will not be cowed by bullies. Today the more courageous parts of the Anglican Communion are Canada, the United States, and Mexico; soon it will be the United Kingdom and Ireland, most of Australasia, most of non-Mexico Latin America, and part of Africa.

I feel the wind of change, and it is stronger than any fundamentalist hoped-for distortion can contain.

Posted by Jerry Hannon at Tuesday, 1 May 2007 at 4:16am BST


I would venture to guess that not 0.01 per cent of the CANA faithful would like to live in Nigeria. If they did they would be less enthusiastic about the Church they now belong to.

When I was growing up, my parents taught me many wise things. One was, a fool will spend your money, if you let them. The massive legal bills will not be coming out of the coffers of the Anglican Church of Nigeria or Bishop Minns.

On my desk calendar the other day the motto was

Stubborn people make lawyers wealthy.

Oh that I was a lawyer in Virginia.

Why can' they be like the Congregationalists of Plymouth , Mass....descendents of the Mayflower. When that Church split over the Holy Trinity in the early 19th century ,the orthodox lost the historic Church.

They built a new church and said... " Well you can keep the furniture , we will keep the Faith."

A far more noble path.

Posted by Robert Ian Williams at Tuesday, 1 May 2007 at 6:28am BST

CB / Leonard - and what will you say when ++Akinola is not censured.

You are aware of TWR, Dromatine, Tanzania - right? (I am not making up what I think the ABC is doing, just looking at his actions which speak louder than your words)

Posted by NP at Tuesday, 1 May 2007 at 7:03am BST

Cynthia,

Akinola does not claim to be the authentic TEC presence in the USA, nor does Martyn. They claim to be an authentic Anglican Nigerian presence, which they are.

Posted by James Crocker at Tuesday, 1 May 2007 at 10:56am BST

With regard to Bp. Minns on there being two Bishops of Virginia, one RC the other TEC, thus giving precedent for a Bishop for Nigeria in Virginia: which came first in the Colony of Virginia - the Church of England, which became the Episcopal church after the revolution, or the Church of Rome in Virginia? Not that it matters. Whichever came second did not do so while taking away the assets of the other.

To NP, I regret I do not read your posts, for my soul's sake, except by accident when they are quoted in the ripostes of others. It appears to me your posts, as I see of them, are not designed to be part of a thinking conversation edifying (that is, building up) the church, but rather as grenades thrown to demoralize and terrify this readership, and others are led thereby to cause the thinking conversation here to deteriorate.
I do apologize for ignoring you to the extent which I do so. I would be willing to make an offering of peace, should Simon give permission, by posting on this thread a recipe of your choice - either corn chowder Lois, or pork chops Lois. But be warned: I am a cook, so there are no specific amounts to the ingredients. (Ah, now there is a metaphor.)
In the Peace of Christ, I am
Lois Keen

Posted by Lois Keen at Tuesday, 1 May 2007 at 11:33am BST

Regarding Bp. Minns remark that Peter Lee calls himself Bishop of Virginia while a Roman Catholic bishop is just down the street - the Episcopal Diocese of Virginia predates any RC presence in the Old Dominion, the prelate down the street is The Bishop of Richmond not the Bishop of Virginia (there is another RC diocese whose see is Alexandria) and Peter Lee doesn't claim to be the bishop of the Roman Catholics in Virginia nor bishop of the many Eastern Christians there either. Surely Bp. Minns doesn't claim to be the Episcopal Bishop of Virginia? to my knowledge he has made no such claims to date.

Posted by Burl at Tuesday, 1 May 2007 at 1:50pm BST

NP - What you fail to grasp is that there are two rules, one for ++Akinola the Donitist claimjumper, one for the rest of us.

TWR became a dead letter upon it's publication since it was aplied only to TEC. ++Akinola has refused to engae in the conversation in Lambet 1:10, and has ignored anything that might be an act of censure in any document since. If membership in the AC means living with hypocritical, mean spirited and childish actions like ++Akinola's I think we will be better off outside of it.

Posted by John Robison at Tuesday, 1 May 2007 at 2:50pm BST

Who was first in Virginia?

In June 1526, Lucas Vasques de Ayllon entered the Chesapeake Bay in Virginia, which he named Madre de las Aguas ('Mother of Waters), and ascending the Guandape (James River) landed at a place he called St. -Michael. With him were Father Antonio de Cervantes and Brother Peter de Estrada, all being of the order of St. Dominic. He established a colony which lasted less than a year. No further Spanish attempt at colonization was made until 1570, when Menendez, Governor of Florida, fitted out an expedition headed by Fathers Segura and Louis Quiros. The expedition planted, its little colony on the banks of the Rappahannock, but was soon betrayed by a supposedly converted Indian who had received the baptismal name of Don Louis de Valasco.

The first English Colony of Roanoke, originally consisting of 100 householders, was founded in 1585, 22 years before Jamestown and 37 years before the Pilgrims landed in Massachusetts. When Sir Francis Drake put in at Roanoke after destroying the Spanish colony of St. Augustine, the entire colony returned with Drake to England.

Interestingly, when Drake picked up these colonists, he left behind 15 of his own men, who were never heard from again. This foreshadowed one of the great mysteries of North America, Roanoke's so-called "Lost Colony" of 90 men, 17 women and 9 children, founded in 1587 and discovered to be missing in 1590, but for the word "Croatan" carved on a post. The first native-born American Anglicans were baptized in Virginia in 1587.


In June of 1606, King James I granted a charter to a group of London entrepreneurs. By December, 108 settlers sailed from London instructed to settle Virginia, find gold and a water route to the Orient. On May 14, 1607, the Virginia Company explorers landed on Jamestown Island, to establish the first permanent English colony on the banks of the James River 60 miles from the mouth of the Chesapeake Bay. St. John’s Church Hampton, Virginia was founded in 1610, and is the oldest Episcopal parish in the United States.

Posted by Kurt at Tuesday, 1 May 2007 at 3:28pm BST

"Akinola does not claim to be the authentic TEC presence in the USA, nor does Martyn. They claim to be an authentic Anglican Nigerian presence, which they are."

I rather suspect that if the RC Bishop of the Diocese of Richmond were confronted with an African RC Archbishop setting up shop in his diocese the response would not be a welcomong one.

My understanding is that Akinola and his folllowers claim that TEC is not longer 'really' part of the Anglican Communion, but they, CANA, are.

That at least is how they have pitched things They only await the Wuss of Lambeth kicking us out.

Hope they don't hold their breaths. OTOH, if we get kicked out, I hope we will take our money with us.

Posted by Cynthia Gilliatt at Tuesday, 1 May 2007 at 4:58pm BST

Having read an article on Nigeria in today's Education Guardian, I do wonder that ++Abuja hasn't got more pressing demands at home....

[SS adds]
The article is here
http://education.guardian.co.uk/egweekly/story/0,,2068752,00.html

Posted by Mynsterpreost (=David Rowett) at Tuesday, 1 May 2007 at 5:52pm BST

"I do wonder that ++Abuja hasn't got more pressing demands at home...."
What could possibly be more important than avenging the horrors of the colonialist past? Or am I the only one who sees a thread of this in the machinations of My Lord of Abuja? Am I just being petty? Don't forget, he has said human sauffering is not important.

Posted by Ford Elms at Tuesday, 1 May 2007 at 6:20pm BST

Ford,
did he really say that human suffering is not important?
And I thought nothing that man says could still shock me.

Posted by Erika Baker at Tuesday, 1 May 2007 at 7:19pm BST

Erika, here's the full quote:

"I didn’t create poverty. This church didn’t create poverty. Poverty is not an issue, human suffering is not an issue at all, they were there before the creation of mankind."

This doesn't resemble any kind of Christianity I have ever heard of.

Posted by JPM at Wednesday, 2 May 2007 at 4:15am BST

Thanks, Ford.
Human suffering was there before the creation of mankind - the mind boggles!

Posted by Erika Baker at Wednesday, 2 May 2007 at 8:29am BST

"On my desk calendar the other day the motto was

Stubborn people make lawyers wealthy.

Oh that I was a lawyer in Virginia."

Someone has emailed me that ENS reports developments in South Carolina. Am in the midst of final exams, so hope someone else can find a link and post the article.

Here's the gist:
Evidently a lower court in South Carolina has ruled against the usurpers on Pawley's Island who think they are Rwandans and for the vestry that remained loyal to TEC and that holds the property in trust for TEC.

Doubtless this will be appealed, but it is a hopeful sign.

I think if you want to belong to the Anglican Church of Rwanda or Nigeria you ought to go and live there for a year. Just a thought. Probably not as comfy as Pawley's Island or Northern Virginia's affluent suburbs ...

Posted by Cynthia at Wednesday, 2 May 2007 at 3:21pm BST

Yeah, I am also a bit unsure how human suffering could have existed before humans did, but our new pope is infallible, so we must not overanalyze his words.

Posted by JPM at Wednesday, 2 May 2007 at 5:30pm BST
Post a comment









Remember personal info?






Please note that comments are limited to 400 words. Comments that are longer than 400 words will not be approved.

Cookies are used to remember your personal information between visits to the site. This information is stored on your computer and used to refill the text boxes on your next visit. Any cookie is deleted if you select 'No'. By ticking 'Yes' you agree to this use of a cookie by this site. No third-party cookies are used, and cookies are not used for analytical, advertising, or other purposes.