The Episcopal Church’s Executive Council October 23 renewed its ongoing support of dioceses in which the leadership has left or plans to leave the church, and pledged the church to seek reconciliation “without precondition on our part.”

Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori told council members that she appreciated their sense that irreconcilable differences are inconsistent with the gospel. “It is profoundly unchristian and unhopeful to say that differences can be irreconcilable,” she said.

House of Deputies President Bonnie Anderson echoed that sentiment during a post-meeting news conference, noting that the remaining members of the Diocese of San Joaquin “have done some very, very hard work ”¦ in reconciliation in trying to draw in people who were, shall we say, on the fence.” Executive Council said October 23 that “it stands ready to help,” Anderson added.

During the closing sessions of its four-day meeting in Helena, the seat of the Diocese of Montana, the council passed four resolutions that speak to various aspects of its commitment to the new leadership of the dioceses of Pittsburgh and San Joaquin, as well as to other “similarly situated dioceses.”

Read it all.

The interfaith coalition that formed in the 1990s to lobby for religious liberty in China was so large and so diverse that even the New York Times noticed it.

One petition included two Catholic cardinals and a dozen bishops, Evangelical broadcasters, Eastern Orthodox bishops, Muslims, Tibetan Buddhists, Baha’is, Orthodox and liberal rabbis, Scientologists and Protestant clergy of a various and sundry races and traditions. One Times article noted that these were signatures that “rarely appear on the same page.”

But there’s the rub. This was already old news.

Many of these religious leaders had already been working for a year or more on what became the International Religious Freedom Act of 1998, landmark legislation that made religious freedom a “core objective” in all U.S. foreign policy, noted political scientist Allen Hertzke of the University of Oklahoma, speaking at a conference called “The Politics of Faith — Religion in America.”

Read it all.

The initiative could be the most sweeping government effort directed at mortgage borrowers since the financial crisis began last year. Under the plan, the government would agree to shoulder half of the losses on home loans if mortgage companies agreed to lower borrowers’ monthly payments for at least five years, according to the people briefed on the plan who asked not to be named because details were still being negotiated.

Officials from the Treasury Department and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation are working on the proposal and an announcement may come soon. Sheila C. Bair, the chairwoman of the F.D.I.C., has been the leading proponent of the plan and first discussed the idea publicly a week ago.

The plan could cost $40 billion to $50 billion and would be part of the $700 billion financial bailout package that Congress approved earlier this month. The money would go toward covering future losses on loans that are modified according to standards established by the government.

Read it all.

It’s an article of faith in U.S. politics that, when it comes to the popular vote at least, Catholics determine the winners in our presidential contests.

In fact, with the notable exception of George W. Bush eight years ago, no candidate in recent memory has entered the White House without securing a majority of the votes cast by Catholics, who now make up more than a fourth of the U.S. population….

That approach isn’t working for John McCain, particularly in Pennsylvania, where strategists in both parties seem to agree the Republican nominee’s chances will rise or fall.

Read it all.

(Via email–KSH).

The Right Reverend Keith L. Ackerman, VIIIth Bishop of Quincy, has announced to the Standing Committee his retirement as Diocesan Bishop effective November 1st, 2008. Bishop Ackerman has reached this decision after much thought and prayer. The Bishop and his wife Jo conferred with his physicians, many trusted friends, and the Standing Committee before making this decision.

While Bishop Ackerman is retiring from his administrative duties as executive officer of the Diocese, he plans to remain in the area of the Diocese for some time and will make himself available, under arrangement with the Standing Committee, to perform Episcopal acts and provide spiritual counsel to members of the Diocese, as have Bishop Donald Parsons and Bishop Edward MacBurney, the VIth and VIIth Bishops of Quincy.

Under diocesan canons, the Standing Committee will continue to act as the ecclesiastical authority of the diocese, as they have since the Bishop’s sabbatical began in late August. Day to day operations of the diocese will continue to be handled by the various officers and department heads.

Bishop Ackerman wants to assure everyone that he has no intention of abandoning the diocese but will continue to provide spiritual and pastoral support as asked by the Standing Committee.

The hottest campaign in Michigan this fall features no candidate, but an embryo.

In the fight over Proposal 2, advocates and opponents are spending millions to shape voter opinion on a proposal to loosen current restrictions on embryonic stem cell research in the state.

In West Michigan, Amway co-founder Richard DeVos has given $200,000 to fight the proposal to free up state funds for the research, according to recent campaign finance statements.

Read it all.

Debbie Kidd of the nonprofit Family Services Inc. in North Charleston, which offers free foreclosure counseling, said the growing volume of delinquent mortgages is no longer just a problem within the real estate industry. It is now a symptom of broader mounting financial hardships, she said.

Many families Kidd sees are one major unplanned expense or other economic disruption away from losing their homes. It could be a broken-down car, a medical emergency or the loss of a second job.

“It takes very little to push a family over the edge these days because they’re living paycheck to paycheck,” she said.

Read it all.

(Received via email–KSH)

A STATEMENT TO THE PARISH
Concerning Actions Relating to The Episcopal Church

At its retreat last February, the Vestry discussed the numerous actions taken by The Episcopal Church (TEC) and many of its leaders that are contrary to traditional Christian faith, and which have marginalized TEC with many of its sister churches in the Anglican Communion. Building on a letter to the congregation from the Vestry dated July 26, 2006, a process of discernment was begun to explore how Christ Church can today best differentiate itself with its core values and beliefs from the theological innovations being pursued by TEC. Five options were identified that ranged from accepting the authority of TEC and submitting to its teachings and leadership, to making a full break with TEC and becoming an independent church with no denominational affiliation. The option which was chosen to pursue at this time, and which the Vestry has acted upon, is:

to disassociate from TEC’s false teachings without disconnecting from the Anglican Communion and the Diocese of West Texas.

During this time we have kept Bishop Lillibridge fully informed of our process. Vestry teams have met with him on three occasions, and we have had numerous email correspondence with him as well. With his knowledge and considering his counsel, at its meeting on October 21, 2008, the Vestry passed the following resolutions concerning Christ Church’s relationship to The Episcopal Church and the Diocese of West Texas:

1. AFFIRMED: that Christ Episcopal Church is apostolically connected to the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church of Jesus Christ directly through the Anglican Communion, the Archbishop of Canterbury and our diocesan bishop, the Rt. Rev. Gary Lillibridge. This apostolic connection is not through the provincial structure of The Episcopal Church or its Presiding Bishop;

2. RESOLVED: to continue to participate fully in the life of the Diocese of West Texas and to pay its full diocesan apportionment;

3. RESOLVED: that Christ Episcopal Church disassociates itself

”¢ from those actions of The Episcopal Church’s General Convention that impair The Episcopal Church’s relationships with other provinces of the Anglican Communion;

Ӣ from those statements and actions made by the Presiding Bishop and other leaders within The Episcopal Church that support positions that have not been tested or accepted by the Anglican Communion or the wider Christian community;

Ӣ from the failure of the Presiding Bishop and other bishops and leaders to live within the guidelines of the Windsor Report.

For his part, Bishop Lillibridge assured us that he is, and will continue:

”¢ to be a “Windsor” bishop, affirming the Windsor Report;

Ӣ to support a diocesan policy that allows congregations and individuals to redirect their portion of TEC funds to other ministries outside the diocese;

”¢ to support CEC’s relationships with the wider communion, such as with Uganda and Nigeria.

We believe that this statement and these actions allow our parish to affirm the historic Christian faith that we proclaim, yet reject the erroneous teachings that are accepted by many in TEC.

Unanimously Approved October 21, 2008

The clergy and lay delegates of the Episcopal Diocese of Connecticut voted Saturday to ask the bishop to allow same-sex weddings, as the state Supreme Court’s decision to legalize gay marriage in the state becomes official today.

The resolution at the annual diocesan convention passed 174-132, but is not binding on Bishop Andrew D. Smith, who said he is studying the issue.

According to the resolution, the convention “implores the bishop to allow priests in this diocese to exercise pastoral wisdom and care and follow the lead of their consciences in whether or not to participate in marriage ceremonies of same-sex couples.”

Read it all.

Few analysts outside the McCain campaign appear to share this view. And pollsters this time around will not make the mistake that the Gallup organization made 60 years ago — ending their polling more than a week before the election and missing a last-minute surge in support for Truman. Every day brings dozens of new state and national presidential polls, a trend that is expected to continue up to Election Day.

Still, there appears to be an undercurrent of worry among some polling professionals and academics. One reason is the wide variation in Obama leads: Just yesterday, an array of polls showed the Democrat leading by as little as two points and as much as 15 points. The latest Washington Post-ABC News tracking poll showed the race holding steady, with Obama enjoying a lead of 52 percent to 45 percent among likely voters.

Some in the McCain camp also argue that the polls showing the largest leads for Obama mistakenly assume that turnout among young voters and African Americans will be disproportionately high. The campaign is banking on a good turnout among GOP partisans, whom McCain officials say they are working hard to attract to the polls.

“I have been wondering for weeks” whether the polls are accurately gauging the state of the race, said Steven Schier, a political scientist at Carleton College in Minnesota. Borrowing from lingo popularized by former defense secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, Schier asked what are the “unknown unknowns” about polling this year: For instance, is the sizable cohort of people who don’t respond to pollsters more Republican-leaning this year, perhaps because they don’t want to admit to a pollster that they are not supporting the “voguish” Obama?

Read it all.

Economic troubles are forcing states to scale back safety-net health-coverage programs ”” even as they brace for more residents who will need help paying for care.

Many cuts affect Medicaid, which pays for health coverage for 50 million low-income adults and children nationwide, including nearly half of all nursing home care. The joint federal-state program is a target because it consumes an average 17% of state budgets ”” the second-biggest chunk of spending in most states, right behind education.

“Medicaid programs across the U.S. are going to be severely damaged,” says Kenneth Raske, president of the Greater New York Hospital Association. He expects some hospitals nationwide may drop services and some hospitals and nursing homes may lay off employees.

Read it all.

Nevertheless, we believe that Iain has failed to grasp the real position of the Church of England in relation to doctrine and Scripture. His article speaks of the conference redefining ”˜Anglican’ in relation to a historic definition in which membership involves adhering to the established church and being in communion with the see of Canterbury. This is to swallow a definition that has been promoted by Anglo-Catholics since the 19th century. A Catholic view of the church sometimes emphasises order and office at the expense of doctrine and, therefore, the serious misunderstanding that fellowship with the Archbishop of Canterbury is essential to the definition of what it means to be Anglican has been spread abroad. Yet the historic position is that being Anglican essentially involves commitment to biblical doctrine.

That is why the GAFCON Jerusalem Statement insists our identity as Anglicans is expressed in the words of Canon A5: ”˜The doctrine of the Church of England is grounded in the Holy Scriptures, and in such teachings of the ancient Fathers and Councils of the Church as are agreeable to the said Scriptures. In particular, such doctrine is to be found in the Thirty-nine Articles of Religion, the Book of Common Prayer, and the Ordinal’. This is why the Jerusalem Statement then stated: ”˜While acknowledging the nature of Canterbury as an historic see, we do not accept that Anglican identity is determined necessarily through recognition by the Archbishop of Canterbury’. It is essential to see that the historic and evangelical position is that being Anglican depends on what you believe more than particular features of church life and order.

A lesser point is that Iain queries point 4 of the Jerusalem Declaration which says: ”˜We uphold the 39 Articles as containing the true doctrine of the church’. He says that the word ”˜containing’ is an escape clause. However the intention in this expression is simply to make it clear that while committed to their confession of faith we do not regard the 39 Articles as God’s own words. We have noted that Gresham Machen (Christianity and Liberalism, p.163) complains about ministers who, as required, solemnly declare at their ordination that the ”˜Westminster Confession contains the system of doctrine taught in infallible Scriptures’ and then decry that same Confession. What was good enough for Gresham Machen is good enough for us as well.

Read it all.

Neither I, nor anyone at the Boniuk Center at Rice University, will ever define tolerance with reference to these beliefs. Rice is a secular research university, and our Center there has no theological commitment one way or the other. We don’t do theology. We don’t promote it, nor do we condemn it. Only when it calls outright for the direct harm or death (in this world, not the next) of individuals or groups do we question it. Believing your god is the only true god, or that your religion is better than all the others does not, in itself, contradict the principle of tolerance. Our promotion of tolerance does not demand that anyone renounce those beliefs.

Nor do we promote tolerance as an ideology. Unlike Marxists, fascists or other ideologues, we do not have a grand vision for the world that we are now organizing and implementing through socio-political processes. Tolerance, for us, is not a doctrine or dogma; it’s not an agenda. People are not “with us” or “against us” based on their acceptance or rejection of tolerance. As I said above, the only litmus test to which we would submit anyone is whether or not they are calling for direct and measurable harm to anyone, especially in matters of belief. Words like “kill them” or “kill him” are red flags for us, no matter who speaks them.

Instead, we promote tolerance as a civic and personal virtue, mostly for practical reasons. The demographic reality of our lives – in Houston, in America and in the world – is that we are destined to share the planet with people who are radically different from us in belief, perspective and lifestyle. Some may not like this fact, but it is a fact nevertheless. And each of us has to decide how we will live and act inside this reality.

Read it all and the comments too.

First came the mortgage crisis. Now comes the credit card crunch.

After years of flooding Americans with credit card offers and sky-high credit lines, lenders are sharply curtailing both just as an eroding economy squeezes consumers.

The pullback is affecting even credit-worthy consumers and threatens an already beleaguered banking industry with another wave of unprecedented losses after a gilded era in which it reaped near-record gains from the business of easy credit that it helped create.

Read it all.

While both presidential candidates enter the campaign’s final week promising to be the better fiscal steward, each has outlined tax and spending proposals that would make annual budget deficits worse, analysts say, with Senator John McCain likely to create a deeper hole than Senator Barack Obama would.

McCain, the Republican nominee, has proposed bigger tax cuts. He has also promised more in spending cuts, but he has not specified where most of them would come from. Even now that the financial crisis has given rise to one bailout package and prompted both candidates to call for billions more in stimulus spending, McCain has stuck by his promise to balance the budget by the end of his term, a pledge that fiscal analysts call unachievable.

Obama, his Democratic rival, has vowed to reduce the deficit and put it on a path to balance. He also promises an expensive effort to make health care insurance more widely available, a raft of other spending programs and tax cuts for most families and small businesses. He would raise taxes on the wealthiest households to help pay for his health care plans.

Neither presidential candidate has provided enough detail, especially about spending programs and what they would cut, for budget groups to put price tags on their agendas.

Read it all.

Read it all.

Check it out carefully.

———
Update from the elves:
Here’s a graphic version of the data on Membership and ASA change. (click on the image for a larger view)
You can also look at the spreadsheet and another graph [url={filedir_4}TEC_2007.xls]here.[/url]

[url=images/TEC_2000-2007.JPG][/url]

One would have to have been living on Mars not to have encountered the increasingly popular notion that our behaviour has an evolutionary explanation. According to evolutionary psychology we behave as we do because we are designed to optimise the chances of our surviving long enough to reproduce. Men who sleep with a lot of women or traders who aim to maximise their returns on their investments are simply responding to the fundamental biological imperative to make the world safe for their genes.

You may think that you chose your mate because she was kind and witty and shared your view of the world. Forget it: you were attracted to her because she had a waist:hip ratio that approximated to 0.7 – a figure that is associated with good health and fertility. As for your political or religious beliefs, they improve your chances of survival or that of the group to which your belong. You haven’t chosen them; they have chosen you.

Not everyone is persuaded by the terrible simplificateurs who preach the gospel of evolutionary psychology….

Read it all.

“For 5,000 years, EVERY culture and EVERY religion — not just Christianity — has defined marriage as a contract between men and women,” [Rick] Warren wrote [in an e-mail to church members]. “There is no reason to change the universal, historical definition of marriage to appease 2% of our population. This is one issue that both Democrats and Republicans can agree on. Both Barack Obama and John McCain have publicly opposed the redefinition of marriage to include so-called ‘gay marriage.’ Even some gay leaders, like Al Rantel of KABC oppose watering down the definition of marriage.

“Of course, my longtime opposition is well known. This is not a political issue, it is a moral issue that God has spoken clearly about. There is no doubt where we should stand on this issue.”

Warren concluded: “This will be a close contest, maybe even decided by a few thousand votes. I urge you to VOTE YES on Proposition 8 — to preserve the biblical definition of marriage. Don’t forget to vote!”

Read it all.

[The] work of preaching has a nasty way of getting one into trouble. It seems that the more faithful one is in preaching, the more trouble one encounters. You preach the Word, you speak the truth of the Scriptures, and the next thing you know, you are on the front page of the newspaper, or sitting in front of a group of agitated deacons or elders; even the youth group is up in arms about whatever you said…

“It cannot be a fierce determination alone that strengthens us for the lifelong work of preaching. The stakes are much too high and the perils much too deadly for that. Instead, our perseverance in the task of preaching must be based on God’s promise that He will, by His own power, make the preaching of His Word effective…

“We preach, not because we have come to the conclusion that preaching is the most rational or most effective means of reaching the lost, but because God has commanded it–and because He has promised to take that which the world would say is foolishness, and use it to save sinners.”

–Albert Mohler, He Is Not Silent: Preaching in a Postmodern World

One final story goes to the heart of the connectedness of the body. At various times I found myself in formal and informal discussions where concerns were voiced about differences in the interpretation of scripture as it relates to the full inclusion of gays and lesbians in the life of the Church. I was astonished to hear stories of brutality and murder against Anglican Christians in some parts of the world where Christians and Muslims coexist in an uneasy peace. We were told that clergy and their families as well as lay members of congregations are regularly targeted to be beaten and/or killed after a news report reached their area from the “west” about gay marriage or other actions which appear to the perpetrators as direct acts against God.

I can tell you that none of the bishops I spoke with asked us to undo what has been done. None of the bishops I spoke to were willing to tear apart the Communion over their disagreement with us. However, I must share with you that they did ask us to slow down, and in the midst of our pursuit for justice remember to seek justice for those whose lives are lost in response to some of the actions we have taken; actions we call righteous. How our relationships with others in the Anglican Communion are defined as we step off into the future are as yet unclear. I know only that we must put our whole faith and trust in God.

Read it all.

After this week’s discussions with bishops of the Anglican church from across Canada, Bishop Barry Clarke of Montreal plans to launch a process to work out a rite for blessing same-sex couples in the diocese who have been married in civil ceremonies.

In an opening statement Oct. 24 to the annual synod of the diocese of Montreal, the bishop said he believes that in the current debate about same-sex issues some are being called to speak with a prophetic voice, others with a voice of caution.

“For reasons, perhaps known only to God, I believe we, in the diocese of Montreal, are among those who have been called by God to speak with a prophetic voice,” he said. “It is our voice that is called to affirm that all people are loved, valued and precious before God and the Church. It is our voice that is called to affirm that all unions of faithful love and life-long commitment are worthy of God’s blessing and a means of God’s grace. In time our voice will either be affirmed by the body, or stand corrected.”

Read it all.

Roughly speaking, there are four steps to every decision. First, you perceive a situation. Then you think of possible courses of action. Then you calculate which course is in your best interest. Then you take the action.

Over the past few centuries, public policy analysts have assumed that step three is the most important. Economic models and entire social science disciplines are premised on the assumption that people are mostly engaged in rationally calculating and maximizing their self-interest.

But during this financial crisis, that way of thinking has failed spectacularly. As Alan Greenspan noted in his Congressional testimony last week, he was “shocked” that markets did not work as anticipated. “I made a mistake in presuming that the self-interests of organizations, specifically banks and others, were such as that they were best capable of protecting their own shareholders and their equity in the firms.”

So perhaps this will be the moment when we alter our view of decision-making. Perhaps this will be the moment when we shift our focus from step three, rational calculation, to step one, perception.

Read it all. I am all for “behavioral economists and others who are bringing sophisticated psychology to the realm of public policy.” But we do not just need psychology we need hamartiology–a sense of sin. The core reason for misperception is, in C.S. Lewis’ phrase, because we are “bent–KSH.”

In northern Iraq, thousands of Christian families remain displaced from their homes in the city of Mosul.

Many are living with relatives or taking refuge in churches and monasteries in an area north of the city that’s known as the Nineveh Plain.

As they struggle to adapt to their new circumstances, many are questioning why they were targeted for violence and threats. Some say they see themselves as pawns in the struggle for control of their ancestral homeland.

Read it all.

While infidelity rates do appear to be rising, a vast majority of people still say adultery is wrong, and most men and women do not appear to be unfaithful. Another problem with the data is that it fails to discern when respondents cheat: in a troubled time in the marriage, or at the end of a failing relationship.

“It’s certainly plausible that women might have increased their relative rate of infidelity over time,” said Edward O. Laumann, professor of sociology at the University of Chicago. “But it isn’t going to be a huge number. The real thing to talk about is where are they in terms of their relationship and the marital bond.”

The General Social Survey data also show some encouraging trends, said John P. Robinson, professor of sociology and director of the Americans’ Use of Time project at the University of Maryland. One notable shift is that couples appear to be spending slightly more time together. And married men and women also appear to have the most active sex lives, reporting sex with their spouse 58 times a year, a little more than once a week.

“We’ve looked at that as good news,” Dr. Robinson said.

Read it all.

Read it all.

Cardinal Kasper, who has given generously of his time to the Church of England recently, spoke for many Anglicans when he said, ‘It occurs to me that at critical moments in the history of the Church of England and subsequently of the Anglican Communion, you have been able to retrieve the strength of the Church of the Fathers when that tradition was in jeopardy. The Caroline divines are an instance of that, and above all, I think of the Oxford Movement. Perhaps in our own day it would be possible too, to think of a new Oxford Movement, a retrieval of riches which lay within your own household.

‘This would be a re-reception, a fresh recourse to the Apostolic Tradition in a new situation. It would not mean a renouncing of your deep attentiveness to human challenges and struggles, your desire for human dignity and justice, your concern with the active role of all women and men in the Church. Rather, it would bring these concerns and the questions that arise from them more directly within the framework shaped by the Gospel and ancient common tradition in which our dialogue is grounded.’
Fr Aidan Nichols has expressed the same sentiments about the need for Anglicans to bring classical Anglicanism into a reunited Church. Thirty years ago Michael Ramsey was advocating the need for a new Oxford Movement. It is an attractive proposition and invites a discerning consideration, not in the sense of replicating a piece of past history, which would be impossible, but in a discernment of what the essence of that Movement was and the underlying principles that motivated it.

The Tractarians’ concern was why the Church was so weak in the face of the dangers which threatened it; dangers not simply from the outside but also in the actual life of the Church of their day. William Palmer said, ‘we felt ourselves assailed by enemies from without and foes within…enemies within the Church seeking the subversion of its essential characteristics and what was worst of all, no principle in the public mind to which we could appeal.’

For such people the Church was no more than an association for the promotion of religion and social virtue. Matters of dogmatic belief, ecclesiastical organization and liturgical observance were only of secondary importance. Hence the Church lacked that clear principle by which it could define its true character and defend itself against the world. So national apostasy and ecclesiastical apostasy were two sides of the same coin.

Our questions are the same. Does the Church have a distinctive and independent witness to the society in which it is set? Is it to be ‘conformed to this world’ or is its purpose to be very much more?

Today’s apostasy is as real as that which Keble preached against. It intrudes itself as a political correctness that is tearing the Anglican Communion apart in the struggle of two incompatible religions. Its aim is to re-interpret biblical and credal orthodoxy and conform it to the secular spirit of the age.

The bishops do not exemplify in their teaching and work their status and function as the apostolic ministry in and to the Church founded by Christ. It is reduced to a functionalism that anyone can do; man or woman. An understanding of the episcopal office is missing in the contemporary Church of England and this is why there is so much confusion over it, not least among bishops themselves; and why it is so difficult to get across its absolute centrality for the Church in reunion discussions.

What stands in the way of this reappraisal of the episcopal order, vital for our Church, is again a want of principle, a principle by which we can assess and reform. For the Tractarians their bishops lacked any understanding of the Episcopal Office and they point us to where we should look for it. They sought to recover it by their emphasis on the Apostolic Succession and the sacramental character of the episcopate. They wanted to revive an awareness of the true character of the bishop, and of the fact that this character was the most important thing about him. It was the symbol of the divine origin of the whole Church.

But the Tractarians were also concerned with the renewal of the priesthood, by their emphasis on sacramental and priestly ideals. This is what changed the whole character of priestly ministry and awakened the parochial clergy with their watch-cry, ‘Stir up the gift that is in you.’

Priests need a true and profound understanding of their calling to receive a ‘divine commission’ that should permeate and inform the whole of their spiritual lives. Only then can genuine and effective priestly action flow and only then will society learn that it needs this distinctive ministry which it can find nowhere else. Renewal in our church must begin, as did the Oxford Movement, though not of course end, with the renewal of the priesthood.

The Tractarians were concerned for a return to the prescriptive sources of Anglicanism. We must make friends with the great Anglican divines of the seventeenth century and the early Christian Fathers that were the bedrock of their theology. This is vital for the renewal of the Church and also for the intellectual and spiritual formation and nourishment of the clergy. For the Tractarians, a priest’s life and work must be grounded in sound doctrine, the traditional and orthodox faith of the Church, which rested for them on the Bible, the early Fathers, the Book of Common Prayer and the Anglican divines of the seventeenth century.

How many priests know the Fathers or anything in their own classical Anglican tradition where there are crucial resources for their intellectual and devotional life? How much is today’s ordinand informed of these resources in theological college? The evidence suggests that emphasis is more heavily weighted on the agenda of politically correct issues than classical Anglican theology.

Our church and its leaders apparently are not presenting a vigorous and reasoned defence of those core doctrines which are the Church’s foundation; doctrines and sacramental life not our own and received from the universal Church. We need to be made aware of the spiritual treasures of the Anglican divines who preserved the Reformed and Catholic heritage of the Church of England; and whose heirs the Tractarians recognized themselves to be.

Once more, Anglican renewal must have its theological side; a re-statement and affirmation of the Church’s historic faith in this twenty-first century. There is little sign of this as yet. These divines have much to say to us of the whole tenor and temper of modern church life. They saw the Christian life in terms of holiness, the sanctity of the individual member and the whole body of the faithful.

Theology is not just a matter of intellectual clarity but the union of human lives with God in the way of holiness. So the Christian life is ‘one of constant discipline where we are immersed in holy things which are to be handled in a spirit of sobriety, austerity and awe.’ This is such a contrast to the loss of dignity in the casualness and laid-back mateyness of much Christian worship today. For these divines the Church is a supernatural body that reflects the divine holiness and this present life is a preparation for the life to come. The ‘life of the world to come’ is not merely in the future but it is a present eternal state that penetrates our earthly life.

After July the outlook looks dark but not hopeless. If it seems that the English Catholic Church is disappearing into sectarianism, remember that it is still present in us. If we are in a New Interregnum then we must realize that we cannot survive by a policy of mere aloofness and obstruction. We must continue to justify our opposition on theological and historical grounds and so inform ourselves to do so.

Our aim and that of our constituency must be to build an edifice of reasoned theology and devotion in support of orthodox Anglican church principles. Not only will this moderate our opponents. It will make these principles intelligible to them. This need is crucially urgent when so many theological schemes for training priests have retreated from theology. We must encourage our young ordinands and laity to engage with us in this endeavour by organizing groups and conferences and providing the necessary resources. From lectures and retreats I am conscious of laity keen to know more about this.

Let us avoid knee-jerk reactions of rushing into the arms of another Communion, or becoming a defeated and bedraggled remnant begging Rome for ecclesiastical asylum. Let us continue to stand firm in our Anglican orthodoxy against the modernism that is doing its worst to conform our Church to secularism. Let us reach out to our Evangelical brethren whose concern is for a biblical and historical Anglican orthodoxy, and then we will have the riches of our Anglican patrimony to bring into a reunited Church when liberalism has withered away.

In this spirit we can take up the challenge of Cardinal Kasper and retrieve the riches which lie within our own household and retrieve the strength of the Church of the Fathers, a fresh recourse to the Apostolic Tradition in a new situation.

–This article appears in the October 2008 edition of New Directions

Before our political leaders get too fancy remaking capitalism next month at the Bretton Woods II summit in Washington, they should attend to urgent business. Since the closure of Lehman Brothers triggered a global banking panic, political leaders in the US and Europe have successfully thrown a cordon round their banks to prevent financial meltdown. What they have not done yet is to co-ordinate macro­economic policies to stop a steep global downturn. This is the urgent agenda.

A US downturn will not be avoided. US households cannot continue to spend more than their income as they have in recent years, even if the credit crunch eases. Household consumption is bound to fall steeply. The writedowns in US household wealth from the reversals in housing and equities will probably reach $15,000bn (€12,000bn, £9,700bn) and the resulting steep decline in private consumption and investment could reach about one-tenth of that amount.

Some”‰other economies will also suffer home-grown recessions because they too allowed a housing bubble to dev­elop,”‰which”‰has”‰now”‰burst. This appears to be the case in Australia, the UK, Ireland and perhaps Spain. This drop in spending outside the US because of capital losses and reversals in housing may add another $300bn-$500bn to first-round decline in global demand.

Yet even a steep recession in the US and in a few other countries need not throw the world into recession….

Read it all.

In a recent study of the political behavior of white Catholics, the political scientist Stephen Mockabee, of the University of Cincinnati, controlling for such factors as age, income and education, discovered that the candidates’ position on abortion had no statistically significant effect on the Catholic presidential vote choice in 2004. How could this be? One way to understand it is that while older white Catholics are much more pro-life than younger ones, they tend to be far more loyal Democratic voters. “Post Vatican II” Catholics””those born after 1960””have trended Republican, but only 7 percent share their church’s position on abortion. When it came to the issues, what pushed white Catholics toward George Bush in 2004 was their support for capital punishment and their opposition to gay marriage; it was not John Kerry’s support for abortion rights.

This time around, it is not the Republicans who are working hard for the Catholic vote, but the Democrats. Hillary Clinton’s Catholic outreach was particularly effective during the primary season, putting together the networks of activists and the e-mail lists that enabled her to give Barack Obama more than a run for his money in states like Pennsylvania and Ohio.

Read it all.