From there:

Columbia, S.C. (May 24, 2023) – Today, in a unanimous order, the South Carolina Supreme Court ruled on the pending petitions and motions before it regarding the remaining three parish properties still in dispute. Today’s order denied all such actions, returning to its earlier decision from August 17, 2022. Two will remain with the Anglican Diocese of South Carolina and one will be returned to the Episcopal Church in South Carolina.

In response to the August ruling, the Church of the Good Shepherd (Charleston) had filed a petition for rehearing, asking the Court to reconsider facts in the case that had resulted in the Court ruling that the Episcopal Church (TEC) maintained a trust interest in their property. That determination has now been affirmed by the Court and the parish will enter into settlement discussions with TEC to resolve the transfer of property and all other remaining issues.

The Episcopal Church on its part had also filed both petitions for rehearing and motions for relief from judgement regarding Old St. Andrews (Charleston) and Holy Cross (Stateburg). The August 17 ruling had affirmed Anglican parish control of those properties. Today’s decision affirmed that outcome for both those congregations. In today’s order, the Court said, “After careful consideration of both petitions for rehearing, the court is unable to discover that any material fault of principle of law has been either overlooked or disregarded, and hence, there is no basis for granting a rehearing.” The court on similar grounds denied the motion for relief of judgement as well.

The Anglican Diocese of South Carolina is grateful to see the final legal issues in these property disputes resolved and the rights of Old St. Andrews and Holy Cross affirmed. They join the other twenty-five parishes whose property rights were confirmed by the earlier rulings. To come to the conclusion of all litigation is a welcome blessing.

While grateful for these good gifts, we mourn the loss of property for Good Shepherd that this order dictates. Like the other seven congregations who received adverse rulings, Good Shepherd will continue on in faith.

The Bishop of The Anglican Diocese of South Carolina, the Rt Revd Chip Edgar, said, “As we have seen with our other parishes whose properties were taken from them, I am confident that the Church of the Good Shepherd will recover from this blow and prosper in the new place to which the Lord will lead them. As we have with our other parishes, the Diocese stands ready to encourage and assist them.”

The Rector of Good Shepherd, the Rev. Will Klauber, assured his congregation today, “The Lord will provide for us a community. He will provide facilities and space for his ministry to continue. We rest assured that Jesus is still seated at the right hand of the Father, and his Spirit is still with us as we navigate these uncharted waters.”

This coming Sunday, we, as a Diocese, will celebrate Pentecost and the outpouring of God’s Spirit to build his Church. We remain confident that his work will continue apace through the Anglican Diocese of South Carolina and its 54 parishes and missions.

#SouthCarolina Supreme Court Final Order:

Two More #Anglican Parishes Have Property Rights Affirmed https://t.co/PUnhy9qykn #law #religion #parishministry #lowcountrylife #history pic.twitter.com/nctjOVwHqL

— Kendall Harmon (@KendallHarmon6) May 24, 2023

The Taliban has further tightened restrictions on Afghan women by banning them from working for the United Nations, putting at risk the agency’s multibillion-dollar aid program in Afghanistan.

The U.N. warned Tuesday of “serious concern” after its female Afghan staff were prevented by the authorities from entering their offices in the eastern province of Nangarhar. Working for the U.N. was one of the last avenues of employment left for women in Afghanistan.

“We remind de facto authorities that United Nations entities cannot operate and deliver lifesaving assistance without female staff,” the U.N. said on Twitter.

The U.N. has repeatedly warned that excluding women from the aid sector is a “red line.” It says aid won’t be able to reach women in need without female employees, as the country’s conservative culture in the country doesn’t allow men and women to mix.

Read it all.

The Taliban has banned Afghan women from working for the United Nations, putting at risk the agency’s multibillion-dollar aid program in Afghanistan https://t.co/6qYZLONJ8G

— The Wall Street Journal (@WSJ) April 4, 2023

The Federal Reserve is facing criticism over Silicon Valley Bank’s collapse, with lawmakers and financial regulation experts asking why the regulator failed to catch and stop seemingly obvious risks. That concern is galvanizing a review of how the central bank oversees financial institutions — one that could end in stricter rules for a range of banks.

In particular, the episode could result in meaningful regulatory and supervisory changes for institutions — like Silicon Valley Bank — that are large but not large enough to be considered globally systemic and thus subject to tougher oversight and rules. Smaller banks face lighter regulations than the largest ones, which go through regular and extensive tests of their financial health and have to more closely police how much easy-to-tap cash they have to serve as a buffer in times of crisis.

Regulators and lawmakers are focused both on whether a deregulatory push in 2018, during the Trump administration, went too far, and on whether existing rules are sufficient in a changing world.

While it is too early to predict the outcome, the shock waves that Silicon Valley Bank’s demise sent through the financial system, and the sweeping response the government staged to prevent it from inciting a nationwide bank run, are clearly intensifying the pressure for stronger oversight.

Read it all.

What happened at Silicon Valley Bank? The failure has accusing fingers pointed at the Fed. And at the central bank, it's kicked off a bout of regulatory soul-searching.

with @FlitterOnFraud https://t.co/qptaFO0iSO

— Jeanna Smialek (@jeannasmialek) March 15, 2023

State laws tend to allow the gambling industry to regulate itself, which means that these companies are expected to identify and exclude their steadiest customers. This has been as unsuccessful as one might expect; as much as 50 percent of revenue comes from “problem gamblers,” while one study showed that in 1998, only 4 percent of gambling revenue from video lottery games came from “responsible” gamers. Just as tobacco companies would go out of business if people used their products responsibly, gambling wouldn’t be a multibillion-dollar industry if it weren’t for addicts.

Marijuana has a more complicated legacy, especially because it has real (but rather modest) benefits for medicinal use. However, careful analyses show that marijuana legalization has contributed to a rise in opioid-related deaths, especially when dispensaries can legally sell all sorts of cannabis products. Permitting dispensaries also increases referrals for addiction treatment, which is unsurprising considering that higher-potency products are more dangerous. The best evidence we have suggests that marijuana is harmful to teenage brains as they develop and that more teenagers use marijuana when it is legalized in their state.

The industries that profit off addiction want to frame the question of access around “responsible use” and occasionally suggest that some people might have a genetic predisposition to addiction. This individualistic framing allows them to avoid talking about how much effort they’re putting into making their products as accessible as possible. Even more important, it elides the question of whether we are all better off when it’s easier to start an addiction and harder to escape one.

There’s a richer and more compelling vision, one that is drawn from philosophical traditions across the ages. It recognizes that our life together isn’t merely a series of contracts we negotiate, and that our ability to make good decisions isn’t based simply on our rationality. Virtue is not simply doing good deeds, but also a set of dispositions and habits that must be practiced in order to flourish. Just as people can be sucked into addictions, we can also work to develop the virtues inside us so that we can be kind, generous, and self-controlled throughout our lives.

Read it all.

America Has Gone Too Far in Legalizing Vice https://t.co/b8WnbgFO49

— Matt Lewis (@mattklewis) February 13, 2023

The Revd Paul Eddy is a vicar in Oxfordshire, Convenor of Anglican Orthodox, and the pubic relations adviser to the influential Global South Fellowship of Anglican Churches (GSFA) which publicly challenged the archbishop liberalising leadership at last year’s Lambeth Conference.  The GSFA’s provinces represent around 75 percent of global Anglicans.

Mr Eddy said: “Sadly, as we found at the Lambeth Conference, the archbishop tells church leaders something which, in their culture, means something different to ours, knowing they don’t have independent advisers on hand to explain. The truth is ‘parliament’ does not mean the UK ‘government’, which is what Anglican Communion delegates, from 40-plus nations, just arrived in Ghana, will think.

“I’ve discussed these issues with MPs from both sides.  There was an Urgent Debate in the Commons on the issue at which (from the BBC Parliament Channel), I counted 11 MP’s present. I think almost all of them gay, and several in gay civil partnerships.  There were less than 30 MPs at any time in the chamber.  With over 400 MPs, that’s hardly a ‘strong challenge from parliament.”

Read it all.

Archbishop of Canterbury challenged over claims of being 'threatened with Parliamentary action' to bring in same-sex marriage in the Church of Englandhttps://t.co/NkKmd3BoiZ pic.twitter.com/Wdo15EndKd

— Anglican Ink (@anglicanink) February 12, 2023

Lambeth Palace has expressed dismay at reports that the Archbishop of Canterbury told MPs that he would rather see the Church of England disestablished than split the Anglican Communion over the issue of same-sex marriage.

Archbishop Welby made the remarks in a private meeting with parliamentarians on Monday. The Church Times understands that it was put to Archbishop Welby that the Church of England’s current position on same-sex marriage was incompatible with its established status, and that the Archbishop replied that he would rather that the Church lost that status than exclude conservative groups in the Anglican Communion. The remarks reportedly were met with some surprise.

A spokesman for Lambeth Palace did not deny that the Archbishop had made a comment of this nature, but said: “We do not recognise the account of the private discussion as it has been leaked, which was much more nuanced and complex than how it has been described.

“The Archbishop agreed to meet for a private conversation with MPs, and it’s disappointing that some parliamentarians have chosen not to honour the terms of the meeting.”

Read it all (registration or subscription).

Lambeth Palace has expressed dismay at reports that the Archbishop of Canterbury told MPs that he would rather see the Church of England disestablished than split the Anglican Communion over the issue of same-sex marriage https://t.co/D1oa7l9GWr

— Church Times (@ChurchTimes) February 2, 2023

On a recent visit to Salt Lake City, Alexander Dyck ordered Chinese takeout and received a branded fortune cookie wishing him wealth and promoting FTX, presumably packaged before the crypto empire’s epic collapse. “I should have saved it,” he said regretfully.

Mr. Dyck is a professor of finance at the University of Toronto, who just published a provocative new study on the pervasiveness of corporate fraud. The study has been passed around in the world of academia in recent weeks, and has become a fascination among general counsels, corporate leaders and investors.

It suggests that only about a third of frauds in public companies actually come to light, and that fraud is disturbingly common. Mr. Dyck and his co-authors estimate that about 40 percent of companies are committing accounting violations and that 10 percent are committing what is considered securities fraud, destroying 1.6 percent of equity value each year — about $830 billion in 2021.

“What people don’t get is how widespread the problem of corporate fraud is,” Dyck said about his study, which was published in the Review of Accounting Studies this month.

Read it all.

Just How Common Is Corporate Fraud? New research by Prof. Alexander Dyck and colleagues via @el72champs @dealbook “What people don’t get is how widespread the problem of corporate fraud is.” https://t.co/pKIrdc3D9r

— Rotman School (@rotmanschool) January 14, 2023

I also came to see that liberalism’s superficial optimism concerning human nature caused it to overlook the fact that reason is darkened by sin. The more I thought about human nature the more I saw how our tragic inclination for sin causes us to use our minds to rationalize our actions. Liberalism failed to see that reason by itself is little more than an instrument to justify man’s defensive ways of thinking. Reason, devoid of the purifying power of faith, can never free itself from distortions and rationalizations.

In spite of the fact that I had to reject some aspects of liberalism, I never came to an all-out acceptance of neo-orthodoxy. While I saw neo-orthodoxy as a helpful corrective for a liberalism that had become all too sentimental, I never felt that it provided an adequate answer to the basic questions. If liberalism was too optimistic concerning human nature, neo-orthodoxy was too pessimistic. Not only on the question of man but also on other vital issues, neo-orthodoxy went too far in its revolt. In its attempt to preserve the transcendence of God, which had been neglected by liberalism’s overstress of his immanence, neo-orthodoxy went to the extreme of stressing a God who was hidden, unknown and “wholly other.” In its revolt against liberalism’s overemphasis on the power of reason, neo-orthodoxy fell into a mood of antirationalism and semifundamentalism, stressing a narrow, uncritical biblicism. This approach, I felt, was inadequate both for the church and for personal life.

So although liberalism left me unsatisfied on the question of the nature of man, I found no refuge in neo-orthodoxy. I am now convinced that the truth about man is found neither in liberalism nor in neo-orthodoxy. Each represents a partial truth. A large segment of Protestant liberalism defined man only in terms of his essential nature, his capacity for good. Neo-orthodoxy tended to define man only in terms of his existential nature, his capacity for evil. An adequate understanding of man is found neither in the thesis of liberalism nor in the antithesis of neo-orthodoxy, but in a synthesis which reconciles the truths of both.

Read it all.

Martin Luther King Jr. in Denver, Colorado on May 19 in 1967. Photo: AP. #MLKDay pic.twitter.com/x0RPS59VIn

— Dr. Jeffrey Guterman (@JeffreyGuterman) January 16, 2023

But neither Lorie Smith nor Jack Phillips turned away any customer because of an immutable characteristic or sexual preference or religious belief. Rather, they refused to create a message that conflicted with sincere convictions. If a straight cousin of a groom asked for a same-sex wedding site, Smith would have turned that person away, as well. If a gay customer wanted a website for his business, Smith would have created it. If a straight couple asked for a bawdy website or a website that declared Xenu the one true Lord of the universe, they too would have been rejected, because that idea also runs afoul of her evangelical Christian beliefs. It’s a shame that Cole and Sotomayor pretend not to comprehend the distinction.

Progressives like to act like Christian (or Islamic or Jewish) opposition to same-sex marriage is some newfangled ruse cooked up by activists to allow them to put “no gays allowed” signs in the shop windows. I assure you that the notion that true marriage is exclusively between one genetic man and one genetic woman is a generational notion. Before his “evolution” on the question, Democrat icon Barack Obama had tethered his opposition to gay marriage to theology.

Whether you agree with this stance or not is entirely irrelevant when it comes to the matter of speech. There is no Hurt Feelings clause in the Constitution. Rather than dealing with the question, Cole, who has a difficult time seeing anything in nonracial terms, lists a slew of scary slippery slope hypotheticals — among them: “Should an architecture firm that believes Black families don’t deserve fancy homes be permitted to turn away Black clients because its work is ‘expressive’?”

Here is a better question: Would Cole, who says the “A.C.L.U. has been this nation’s leading defender of free speech for more than a century,” call for the state to intervene in the case of an evangelical customer who wants to compel a gay designer to create a website for an organization that works to overturn same-sex marriage laws or preaches that acts of homosexuality are a mortal sin? Christians, after all, are also a protected group under anti-discrimination laws. The answer is: highly unlikely.

Read it all.

The Future Of The First Amendment Hinges On The 303 Creative Case Before The Supreme Courthttps://t.co/S6j4WBIPoC

— The Federalist (@FDRLST) December 5, 2022

I will take comments on this submitted by email only to KSHarmon[at]mindspring[dot]com.

“Departments of all sizes are fighting rising crime while facing severe staffing shortages, many due to large numbers of officers resigning amidst retention and recruitment challenges. NBC News’ Ron Allen speaks with former officers to understand why they left and what they think would help keep more officers on the force.”

Watch and listen to it all.

How then can we as Christians respond to the matter of physician-assisted death? First, we can call upon reason and the light of nature to affirm absolutely the value of life. Assisted death and suicide is said to be a matter of respect.

But to value a person is to value their existence. A willingness to deliberately end someone’s existence therefore necessarily devalues the person. If people matter, we must not intentionally end them.

Second, our churches can be communities where assisted death is inconceivable because the weak, the aged, the disabled, and the dying are regarded as priceless members of the community. We can be a place where those who suffer enjoy the devoted companionship, love, and support that reminds them of their value and bears them up through pain. This is, after all, what all of us long for.

Third, we can advocate for access to the very best medical and palliative care for those who are suffering or dying. The palliative care movement was started by a Christian physician, Dame Cicely Saunders, and has transformed medical care at the end of life. Yet access to good palliative care in the US, Canada, and the rest of the world is still far too limited.

Read it all.

“Assisted death is no longer seen as a desperate option of last resort but rather as one ‘therapeutic option’ among many … offered to those whose lives are not regarded as worth living.”https://t.co/jqTcFTWzIP

— Christianity Today (@CTmagazine) October 18, 2022

Reflecting on the agreement, Bishop Edgar said, “This settlement agreement allows us to invest our diocesan energy, time, focus, and resources in gospel ministry rather than litigation. While the losses we have experienced, including those of St. Christopher and several of our parish buildings are painful, I am grateful that the work we have done has brought an end to litigation between our dioceses. I am grateful, too, for the willingness to work to avoid further litigation that Bishop Woodliff-Stanley showed throughout this process. These hard past few months were made easier by her kind and generous willingness to compromise to reach this settlement.”

Bishop Woodliff-Stanley echoed this sentiment: “From the very beginning of this process, I have been grateful for the gracious spirit of Bishop Edgar in doing just this work with us. I am grateful for his leadership and his generosity. While each diocese has had to leave things on the table to get to this moment, and while we experience pain over losses of some of the historic churches our members hold dear, even still, we have seen the Spirit at work in drawing us toward God’s redemptive way of love at every juncture.”

While we give thanks that the legal disputes at the diocesan level are being brought to a close, we nevertheless recognize that a number of our parishes await a final resolution of their legal concerns. It is our prayer that these issues will soon come to a resolution as well as we move forward together as a diocese into this next season of ministry.

What does this next season look like? For some, it will be full of new challenges – and opportunities – as they as they learn to minister outside the walls of their beloved church buildings. For others we’ll seek to pull together as a diocese and grow in our roles as supportive brothers and sisters. For all of us we’ll continue to proclaim the Good News of Jesus Christ and pursue the work of the gospel in South Carolina and beyond out from under the shadow of litigation with a renewed focus on our mission and ministry. Therefore, let us move forward prayerfully, in thanksgiving for this Spirit-led settlement, and in hope for the work of the Gospel and continued in-breaking of the Kingdom of God.

The Rt. Revd Chip Edgar, Bishop of the Anglican Diocese of South Carolina
The Revd B. Tyler Prescott, President, ADOSC Standing Committee

Read it all and follow the link.

We welcome our new Bishop, the Rt Revd Chip Edgar, who was consecrated March 12, 2022. Let's pray regularly for our new bishop, his wife and family and labor alongside him to produce fruit in the vineyard to which we're called. View the service: https://t.co/4dRKj3inei pic.twitter.com/ShByUuXRIk

— Anglican Diocese of SC (@anglican_sc) March 13, 2022

(Via email–KSH)

Dear Sisters and Brothers in Christ,

To file under “we-should’ve-seen-that-coming”…

…(On September 1, 2022)..the Episcopal Church and The Episcopal Church in South Carolina filed a Petition for Reconsideration and Rehearing with the South Carolina Supreme Court asking the Court to reverse their ruling regarding the property rights of two parishes whose rights they had affirmed in their August 17 ruling.

Those parishes are: Old St Andrew’s, Charleston, and the Church of the Holy Cross, Stateburg.

Please join me in praying the Court will deny this final effort and, once and for all, put this case to rest.

Additionally, The Church of the Good Shepherd, Charleston, whose property rights the Court denied in their August 17 ruling, filed a Petition for Rehearing asking the Court to reconsider that ruling.

We’ll pray that the Court will reverse that earlier ruling and affirm the property rights of Good Shepherd.

With me, you are likely tired of the back-and-forth and wondering if this will ever end. It will. Someday, in the not too distant future, I trust these matters will be behind us, and we will move forward—whatever the outcome—into ministry without this distraction. Until then, we do well to heed St Paul’s advice to: “Rejoice in hope, be patient in tribulation, and be constant in prayer.” (Rom 12.12) Never losing sight of the fact that, “…you are from God and have overcome them, for he who is in you is greater than he who is in the world.” That truth can never change.

Blessings,

–The Rt Revd Chip Edgar is bishop of the Anglican Diocese of South Carolina

On July 27, the University of North Carolina (UNC)–Chapel Hill’s Board of Trustees made a strong, new commitment to safeguard the free exchange of ideas on campus. Colleges and universities face immense pressure to comport with majority beliefs, but UNC’s trustees proactively resolved to maintain institutional neutrality on controversial political and social issues.

The trustees’ unanimous resolution built on the previous work of the faculty. To the credit of the UNC Faculty Assembly, it adopted in 2018 the Chicago Principles on Freedom of Expression, an action affirmed by the trustees in March 2021. The faculty resolution read, in part, “By reaffirming a commitment to full and open inquiry, robust debate, and civil discourse we also affirm the intellectual rigor and open-mindedness that our community may bring to any forum where difficult, challenging, and even disturbing ideas are presented.”

The trustees took a remarkable further step. In addition to confirming once more the decision of the Faculty Assembly, they put the university in the vanguard of institutions committed to a robust heterodoxy of views and opinions by also adopting what is known as the Kalven Committee Report on the University’s Role in Political and Social Action. The UNC resolution notes that the Kalven Report “recognizes that the neutrality of the University on social and political issues ‘arises out of respect for free inquiry and the obligation to cherish a diversity of viewpoints’ and further acknowledges ‘a heavy presumption against the university taking collective action or expressing opinions on the political and social issues of the day.’”

In an interview with me, UNC Trustee Dr. Perrin Jones, who introduced the resolution, observed that the unanimity of the board reflected its desire for public affirmation of the university’s commitment to be a forum for open and vigorous debate, which cannot happen without institutional neutrality. Board members embrace, in Dr. Jones’s words, the “high bar” of living up to these “timeless principles.”

Read it all.

My new Forbes column is up. @UNC trustees struck a blow for freedom of speech, reaffirming their fealty to the Chicago Principles on Free Expression. They went one step further & paired that with a promise to maintain institutional neutrality. Inspiring. https://t.co/ze4KrVZ7GV

— Michael B. Poliakoff (@PoliakoffACTA) August 18, 2022

[Diocesan PR] Columbia, S.C. (August 17, 2022) – [Yesterday], the South Carolina Supreme Court granted petitions for rehearing filed by six of seven parishes of the Anglican Diocese of South Carolina.

“We are grateful and heartened that the property rights of six more parishes were affirmed by this ruling,” said the Rev. Canon Jim Lewis. “Today we rejoice with those who rejoice and mourn with those who mourn, but the balance is with rejoicing.” With today’s revised opinion, all property ownership questions are finally settled.

The six churches whose petitions were granted today are: the Church of the Holy Cross (Stateburg), the Church of the Holy Comforter (Sumter), St. Jude’s Church (Walterboro), Old St. Andrew’s (Charleston), St. Luke’s Church (Hilton Head) and Trinity Church (Myrtle Beach).

These six churches, along with 21 others, have now had their property rights affirmed by the Supreme Court. Today’s opinion followed the Court’s earlier April 20 ruling in determining if a parish had created a trust interest in its property in favor of The Episcopal Church (TEC) or its local Diocese (TECSC). Four of the parishes in today’s ruling were judged to have never created a trust, based on that earlier standard. Two more were judged to have created a revocable trust, which they subsequently and properly revoked.

The earlier April 20 ruling stated that 15 parish properties of the Anglican Diocese of South Carolina will also remain with the Anglican Diocese. They are: All Saints, Florence; Church of our Savior, John’s Island; Church of the Cross, Bluffton; Christ-St. Paul’s, Yonges Island; Epiphany, Eutawville; Redeemer, Orangeburg; Resurrection, Surfside/Myrtle Beach; St. Helena’s, Beaufort; St. Paul’s, Bennettsville; St. Paul’s, Summerville; St. Philip’s, Charleston; St. Luke & St. Paul, Charleston; St. Michael’s, Charleston; Trinity, Edisto; and Trinity, Pinopolis. Of the 36 parishes that were parties to this litigation, 28 have had their property rights upheld. All 36 will continue their parish ministries going forward, though some in new locations.

Only one additional parish, the Church of the Good Shepherd, Charleston was ruled today to have created a trust interest in their property on behalf of TEC and TECSC.

In addition to the Church of the Good Shepherd, the April 20 opinion called for transfer of the deeds to Christ Church, Mt. Pleasant; Holy Trinity, Charleston; St. Bartholomew’s, Hartsville; St. David’s, Cheraw; St. Matthew’s, Fort Motte; St. James, Charleston and St. John’s, Johns Island to the Episcopal Church and it’s local diocese, the Episcopal Diocese of South Carolina.

Conversations between the Anglican Diocese, its parishes and the Episcopal Diocese concerning these properties are ongoing. Anglican Diocese Bishop Charles F. Edgar has met with Bishop Ruth Woodliff-Stanley, the leader of the Episcopal Diocese several times to reach resolution on the remaining questions.

The #SouthCarolina Supreme Court Approves Petition for Rehearing Sought by Six Parishes of the #Anglican Diocese of South Carolina https://t.co/bR4pRfZoAr #parishministry #law #religion #history TK pic.twitter.com/3uNpG0jYqQ

— Kendall Harmon (@KendallHarmon6) August 18, 2022

Law enforcement across the country rescued more than 200 sex trafficking victims, including 84 children, in a nationwide sweep dubbed “Operation Cross Country,” the FBI announced Monday. The youngest victim was 11 years old.

Authorities located 84 victims of child sex trafficking, as well as 37 children that were actively missing during the campaign, the FBI said. Law enforcement officers also located 141 adult victims of human trafficking.

In 2021, more than half of all trafficking victims in the U.S. were minors, according to the Human Trafficking Institute. In a news release Monday, FBI Director Christopher Wray called sex trafficking “among the most heinous crimes” the agency encounters.

Read it all.

More than 200 state, local, and federal partners and the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children conducted 391 operations over a two-week period in August. https://t.co/8AjYmMbbtO

— CBS News (@CBSNews) August 16, 2022

Chinese authorities are pushing political critics into psychiatric hospitals where they are subjected to electroshock therapy and forced drugging nearly a decade after the country passed laws against such abuse, a new report said on Tuesday.

The study published by Madrid-based rights group Safeguard Defenders drew on the testimony of 99 people over a period of seven years, with alleged victims saying they were also placed in isolation for long periods and tied to beds where they were forced to lie in their own excrement.

Read it all (subscription).

Chinese authorities are locking political critics into psychiatric hospitals where they are subjected to electroshock therapy and forced drugging nearly a decade after the country passed laws against such abuse https://t.co/lC9VbXngeZ

— Alfons López Tena 🦇 (@alfonslopeztena) August 16, 2022

Just-Ice is an innovative social enterprise that combines a love of ice-cream with a desire to provide sympathetic employment to survivors of modern slavery.

Situated in the heart of Poynton, a leafy suburb in Cheshire, Just-Ice is helping to raise awareness of modern slavery amongst Poynton’s school children, church, and wider community as well as employing several survivors of modern slavery. It is a brilliant example of a group of Christians taking action and could be mirrored in other communities across the country.

Jo Rodman, the founder of Just-Ice Poynton, was considering a vocation in ordained ministry when she heard about a Christian couple in Derby who had turned their passion for ice cream into a thriving social enterprise. She was excited about starting a similar café in Poynton and was encouraged by the Director of Vocations at Chester Diocese to pursue the idea as part of a Distinctive Deacon role. Distinctive Deacons have a strong call to an outward-looking and community-minded ministry. They often have a particular concern for issues of poverty and justice.

Read it all.

A Cheshire ice cream cafe set up by a trainee #DistinctiveDeacon is helping to raise awareness of modern slavery, and employing several survivors of modern slavery.

Read more on this story from @theclewer at https://t.co/XlA4GklXDR. @ChesterDiocese

— The Church of England (@churchofengland) July 21, 2022

Dr Simon Eyre (Chichester), a retired GP, moved a private member’s motion on the subject on Sunday afternoon. “Hospices are suffering from a lack of funding,” he said, and linked this to a pressure to change the law to allow assisted suicide. People might choose to end their lives prematurely rather than face suffering exacerbated by poor-quality palliative care, he said.

“Sanctity of life is central to our understanding as Christians,” he said, and cited Psalm 31: “Our times are in his hands”.

Terminally ill people with depression, and people with disabilities, including learning disabilities, would be put at risk if legislation was changed, Dr Eyre said.

The Suicide Act 1961 prohibits assisted suicide, although directions from the Crown Prosecution Service published in 2010 require that any prosecution be in the “public interest”.

Several attempts have been made in recent years to introduce legislation that would permit assisted suicide in some circumstances, most recently in the form of a Bill in the House of Lords, which failed to reach a Second Reading before Parliament was prorogued in April.

Dr Eyre conceded that palliative care “sometimes fails to deliver”, but said that “the response to this should be to improve palliative care rather than make changes to the Suicide Act.”

Read it all.

“Hospices are suffering from a lack of funding.” https://t.co/opyIeRrAcA

— Church Times (@ChurchTimes) July 11, 2022

Following a debate, members backed a Private Member’s Motion (PMM) paying tribute to the ‘enormous and untiring’ efforts of health professionals working in palliative and end of life care.

They called on the Government to guarantee adequate funding and resourcing of palliative care services to ensure the highest possible standards of care for all. Members further affirmed that the law on Assisted Suicide should remain unchanged.

General Synod member Dr Simon Eyre, from the Diocese of Chichester, introducing the PMM, called for the Government to ensure adequate funding for hospices over the next decade.

He said palliative care was currently ‘insufficiently comprehensive’ with only one palliative care consultant per 100,000 of the population.

Read it all.

Synod rejects assisted dying by a large majority – via @ChurchTimes https://t.co/YXZ508Ss4b

— Religion Media Centre (@RelMedCentre) July 11, 2022

The Bishop of Truro, Philip Mounstephen, told a global summit on Freedom of Religion or Belief (FoRB) hosted by the UK Government, that there had been some good progress in some areas made since the publication of the review in 2019, but ‘much’ still needed to be done.

“The challenge going forward is to keep up the corporate momentum that has developed around this issue because this is a really, really significant global issue,” he told a panel session of the Ministerial Conference on Freedom of Religion or Belief in London today.

“We must not let it sink back into the place that it was before, largely ignored and overlooked.”

Asked what his advice would be to Parliamentarians, Bishop Philip said: “My key message to Parliamentarians would be: understand what the main drivers behind freedom of religion or belief abuses are – we are looking at totalitarian regimes, religious fundamentalism, militant nationalism – these are really serious issues that must be addressed. So please Parliamentarians, make this a bipartisan issue, espouse it across the political spectrum.”

In his remarks during the panel session Bishop Philip welcomed the creation of the UK Freedom of Religion or Belief Public Forum made since the publication of the 2019 report.

Read it all.

Politicians at #FoRBConference have been urged to ‘keep up the momentum’ on tackling abuses of freedom of religion or belief.

Read more on the words of Bishop of Truro, @pmounstephen, at https://t.co/VU303yVRRk.

— The Church of England (@churchofengland) July 6, 2022

The suspect in the shooting, Robert E. Crimo III, 21, had drawn police attention more than once, and despite warnings about his troubling behavior, had gotten a firearm license and bought several guns.

How a young man who had sent troubling signals managed to end up with a semiautomatic rifle in Illinois is a question that is haunting not only the survivors of Monday’s deadly massacre in Highland Park, a Chicago suburb. It is also a question of federal importance, coming just days after President Biden signed into law the most significant gun legislation passed in decades.

As details of Mr. Crimo’s past continued to emerge, and as a judge ordered him held without bail on murder charges on Wednesday, it remained unclear whether the horrific episode revealed weaknesses in state restrictions on guns, or in the limits of even potent safeguards in a system that ultimately relies on the judgments of people — the authorities, families, observers.

Read it all.

"This was a textbook case of a red flag law not being used."

The Highland Park shooter dropped hints that he might be dangerous. Police took his knives away. He was able to buy guns anyway.

@MitchKSmith @campbellnyt @FrancesRobles @sergenyt https://t.co/fBeZ3j1jFu

— Sheryl Gay Stolberg (@SherylNYT) July 7, 2022

Fortunately, in Carson v. Makin, the Supreme Court ruled that faith-based schools cannot be asked to shed their religious identity in order to participate in school-choice programs. As the majority opinion makes clear, Maine’s exclusion of faith-based schools from its tuition assistance program is neither constitutionally required nor constitutionally permissible.

Of course, before the twenty-first century, the state might have been forgiven for making an honest mistake. The Supreme Court’s Establishment Clause doctrine has been all over the map in the second half of the twentieth century. In 1980, many decisions seemed to prohibit students from using public funds to attend religious schools. Speaking of maps, for example, in Meek v. Pittenger (1975) and Wolman v. Walters (1977), the Court held that the Establishment Clause permitted states to provide secular textbooks, but not instructional materials such as maps, to faith-based schools. Seriously.

Thankfully, the Supreme Court’s Establishment Clause doctrine has taken a decidedly pro-religion turn in the past few decades. In decision after decision leading up to Carson, the Court has reiterated that the Constitution demands neutrality and prohibits hostility toward religious institutions and believers. Importantly, in Zelman v. Simmons-Harris (2002), the Court held that the Establishment Clause does not prohibit faith-based schools from participating in publicly funded private-school-choice programs.

Read it all.

Another Chink in the Armor of Legal Discrimination against Religious Schools @nsgarnett https://t.co/e9VNPzCGA6

— Public Discourse (@PublicDiscourse) July 6, 2022

Yet even though she is grateful that Roe has been overturned, Prior cautioned Christians against being hasty with how they move forward, saying that Roe’s absence gives us a unique opportunity to create beneficial legislation.

“For example,” said Prior, “we need to learn the difference between between intervening in the case of an ectopic pregnancy, which is going to be fatal to both mother and child and an abortion.” Because Roe was the law of the land for so long, Christians haven’t had to think through how the answer to such questions will impact the laws we create—but now in some states we have new opportunities.

Said Prior, “We’re going to have to educate ourselves quickly and thoughtfully and not just rush to put legislation in place that would be disastrous or uninformed or medically irresponsible. Of course, we want all of these laws to protect all of the human lives involved, but that’s not something that happens quickly and overnight. We have to really understand what it means to be pro-life and how to apply that in principle.”

Read it all.

While the American church has much to be thankful for with the reversal of Roe v. Wade, says Karen Swallow Prior, it is important to move forward with caution, nuance and compassion. @KSPrior https://t.co/PD9l2eKvxs @ChurchLead #KarenSwallowPrior #abortion

— ChurchLeaders.com (@ChurchLead) June 30, 2022

People often say that abortion isn’t mentioned in the Bible. But the command to protect and honor Life is implicit in every word of Scripture.

First, we need to understand that the value of human life is based in our creation by God and in our redemption through Jesus. “Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own, you were bought at a price. Therefore, honor God with your body.” (1 Corinthians 6:19-20). Our lives have value not because they are ours but because they are His! For this reason, we must live our lives giving glory to God and living in His statues. In this way, Scripture firmly contradicts the “my body, my choice” mantra of abortion supporters.

Second, because our lives have value in Him, we as His people are called to protect and honor all Life. The clearest evidence of this is in the commandment, “You shall not murder.” (Exodus 20:13) But even earlier, in the book of Genesis, God declares that the spilling of man’s blood is inherently wrong, due to our status as God’s beloved creation: “Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed; for in the image of God has God made man.” (Genesis 9:6)

True, society in general believes that murder is wrong. However, Scriptures show that “valuing” Life goes beyond avoiding the act of killing. Honoring the sacredness of Life means serving those in need and sharing the love of God. Christ demonstrates how we should do this: “For I was hungry, and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty, and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not invite me in…Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for Me.” (Matthew 25:41-45) Being a life-affirming Christian means more than opposing death—it means serving those who are hurting, lonely, and broken. It means caring for the “least of these,”—the unborn, the homeless, the single mothers, the elderly, and the handicapped. Because our lives are valuable to God, so theirs must be to us.

God didn’t “forget” to talk about abortion, assisted suicide, or euthanasia in the Scriptures. The gift of Life is proclaimed in all of God’s commands and in everything that God has created, including us.

Read it all.

Why are Anglicans Pro-Life? https://t.co/oQXLUB6xDW

— The Diocese of Western Anglicans (@westernanglican) June 29, 2022

Friends,

As most of you are aware, the South Carolina Supreme Court released its final ruling in our case on April 20 this year. Shortly thereafter, eight of our congregations filed a petition for rehearing, each providing additional legal considerations for the court suggesting the standard adopted by the Court did not, in fact, create a trust interest in their property. Of those eight, there are still seven petitions being given active consideration by the Court.

Last week, legal counsel for the Episcopal Church (TEC) filed their Court directed return, detailing their legal arguments for why the remaining petitions should not be granted. Monday, legal counsel for the parishes in our Diocese filed their reply, providing counter arguments to those in the TEC return last week. Those filings can be found HERE and HERE.

To simplify somewhat, the ruling of the Court is that if a congregation acceded to the constitution and canons of TEC after 1979, it created a trust interest in the property in favor of TEC and its local Diocese. The arguments of the petitioning parishes, supported by yesterday’s reply, addresses two essential issues. Based on the Court’s holdings in April, to create a trust requires present action and present intent. Because the parishes of Holy Comforter, St. Jude’s, St. Luke’s and Trinity Church added their accession clauses long before the adoption of the Dennis Canon in 1979, those actions should not represent present action or intent to create a trust.

The other issue identified for Good Shepherd, Holy Cross and Old St. Andrew’s is that the documents referenced by the Court that created the alleged trust were adopted after January 2006. By state statute 62-7-602(a), trusts created after this date are revocable, unless there is clearly expressed intent at that time they should not be. Arguments provided in the petitions and Monday’s reply demonstrate there was no such intent at the time and these parishes clearly acted with intent to revoke any such interest.

Based on these arguments, it is our hope that these remaining seven parishes will be judged by the Court to have retained unencumbered ownership of their property. The outcome is now fully in the hands of the South Carolina Supreme Court. Please keep the Court, its Justices and staff in your prayers, that justice might be done, and swiftly.

In Christ’s service,

–The Rev. Canon Jim Lewis is Canon to the Ordinary in the Anglican Diocese of South Carolina

An #Anglican Diocese of #SouthCarolina Legal Update for today https://t.co/IzWszSHlj8 #religion #history #parishministry #trustlaw 'The other issue identified is that the documents referenced by the Court that created the alleged trust were adopted after January 2006….' pic.twitter.com/DIKfIFxUk5

— Kendall Harmon (@KendallHarmon6) June 29, 2022

The U.S. Supreme Court’s courageous decision in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization is a win for life and the Constitution. That historic ruling finally reverses the court’s disastrous opinion in Roe v. Wade—a decision that made up a constitutional right to abortion and resulted in the deaths of more than 60 million unborn children. Because of the court’s ruling in Dobbs, states may now fully protect unborn life.

The Mississippi law at issue in the case, the Gestational Age Act, protects unborn children and the health of their pregnant mothers based on the latest science. It protects unborn life after 15 weeks of gestational age—a point in time when babies can move and stretch, hiccup, and quite likely feel pain. It permits abortions to save the life of the mother or for severe fetal abnormalities. Despite the modesty of Mississippi’s law, the lower courts struck it down because no matter what science showed, or how strong a state’s interest in protecting unborn life was, under the Roe regime, states may not protect life until viability—about 22 weeks of gestational age.

Dobbs is a win for life. Fifty years of scientific progress and innovation establish what the Bible has always taught: Life begins at conception. Ultrasound technology allows expectant parents to see the truth of Psalm 139: Children are fearfully and wonderfully made from the very beginning.

Under Roe v. Wade, moreover, the United States has been an extreme outlier in abortion law and policy. As the chief justice noted during oral arguments, the United States is one of only six nations, including China and North Korea, that allow elective abortions through all nine months of pregnancy. The Washington Post recently ranked the United States as the fourth most liberal abortion country in the world. Most countries do not allow elective abortions at all, and 75 percent protect life after 12 weeks of gestation.

Read it all.

Here's is WORLD Opinions' second special edition editorial from @ADFLegal's Erin Hawley and @KWaggonerADF https://t.co/DPENWC7lgK

— Andrew T. Walker (@andrewtwalk) June 24, 2022

From left to right, not many people have had a kind word for Roe v. Wade, the 1973 Supreme Court decision that partially legalized abortion. Radical feminist Catharine MacKinnon called it “a study in male ideology” that “reaffirms what the feminist critique of sexuality criticizes: the public/private split.” Michael Kinsley, editor of “The New Republic”, called it “one of the worst things that ever happened to American liberalism” and warned that “there is a time bomb ticking away” inside it. Conservatives have, of course, registered disapproval often and loudly (sometimes explosively).

Roe v. Wade struck down a Texas law that made abortion a crime except when “procured or attempted by medical advice for the purpose of saving the life of the mother.” The court’s logic was not transparent (Kinsley calls it “a mess,” and many agree), but was essentially this: (1) A woman’s right to make reproductive decisions is part of a “right of privacy” implicit in the 14th Amendment to the constitution, which says that government may not “deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.” (2) A fetus does not have a “right to life” or to “equal protection” because, according to the court, “the word ‘person,’ as used in the Fourteenth Amendment, does not include the unborn.” (3) Constitutionally guaranteed rights may only be infringed when a “compelling” societal interest is at stake. In the case of abortion, society has two legitimate interests: to protect the health of pregnant women and to protect “potential life.” But these interests are not “compelling” from the moment of conception. The former becomes compelling only when the medical risks of abortion become comparable to those of normal childbirth, i.e. (as of 1983) during the second trimester. The latter becomes compelling only when the fetus becomes “viable,” or “capable of meaningful life outside the mother’s womb,” i.e. (as of 1973) during the third trimester. (4) What follows from all this, the court said, is that the state may regulate abortion during the second trimester, but only “in ways that are reasonably related to maternal health,” and may prohibit abortion during the third trimester “except where it is necessary . . . for the preservation of the life or health of the mother.”

Roe raised a host of questions, of two kinds. First: is the court’s reasoning persuasive? Does the constitution really recognize a “right of privacy,” even though it’s not mentioned anywhere in the text? Why doesn’t the 14th Amendment apply to fetuses, even though they are not mentioned anywhere in the text? What is “potential” life? Why does the state have a “compelling interest” in protecting it, even at the expense of actual persons? And why does that interest become compelling at viability rather than at conception or birth?

Read it all.

Today the United States Supreme Court ruled that “the Constitution does not confer a right to abortion,” overruling Roe v. Wade (1973). The decision will “return the issue of abortion to the people’s elected representatives … to be resolved like most important questions in our democracy: by citizens trying to persuade one another and then voting.” In the case of Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization, a five Justice majority of the Supreme Court overruled both Roe and the 1992 decision Planned Parenthood v. Casey.[1]

The inherent value of human life is revealed in the Scriptures, and this biblical commitment is reflected in the Anglican Church in North America’s Constitution and Canons which calls all members and clergy “to promote and respect the sanctity of every human life from conception to natural death” (Title II.8.3).

Archbishop Beach commented:

While this decision doesn’t end abortion in the U.S., it will lead to fewer children being killed through abortion. We thank God for this limited victory, and the Anglican Church in North America recommits itself to serving mothers so they can embrace motherhood and welcome their children. We also continue to point the way to God’s healing and forgiveness for all who suffer physically and emotionally from their abortion experiences.

Read it all.

Let us give thanks to God for this decision and continue to work to safeguard and promote life. Let us also continue to care and minister to those who continue to suffer from the effects of abortion in their own lives. Read more at:https://t.co/tht8oSTEAl #SCOTUS

— ACNA (@The_ACNA) June 24, 2022

The Supreme Court on Friday eliminated the constitutional right to obtain an abortion, casting aside 49 years of precedent that began with Roe v. Wade.

The decision by Justice Samuel Alito will set off a seismic shift in reproductive rights across the United States. It will allow states to ban abortion, and experts expect about half the states to do so.

In one of the most anticipated rulings in decades, the court overturned Roe, which first declared a constitutional right to abortion in 1973, and Planned Parenthood v. Casey, which re-affirmed that right in 1992. The decision followed the leak in early May of a draft opinion showing that a majority of the justices were privately poised to take that step. On Friday, they made it official.

The vote was 6-3. Justices Clarence Thomas, Neil Gorsuch, Brett Kavanaugh, and Amy Coney Barrett joined Alito’s opinion. Chief Justice John Roberts did not join the opinion but agreed with the result and filed a separate opinion. The court’s three liberals, Justices Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan, filed a joint dissent.

Read it all.

The Supreme Court voted 6 to 3 to overturn Roe v. Wade, ending the constitutional right to an abortion.

Read the majority opinion of the court: https://t.co/gGGw6aW8zs

— The New York Times (@nytimes) June 24, 2022