Davidson loses -- by 2!

From ESPN:

. . . Kansas wore down Stephen Curry and plucky upstart Davidson with its size and strength, holding on for a 59-57 victory Sunday that put all four No. 1 seeds into the Final Four for the first time.

"We wanted to make history," Mario Chalmers said, "and we did."

After Kansas' Sherron Collins missed with 21 seconds left, the 10th-seeded Wildcats got one last chance. Curry was double-teamed, could not get off a shot and was forced to pass to Jason Richards, whose 25-footer from the top of the key thudded off the backboard. . .

Read it all.

Where exactly is Davidson? In the Sweet 16, that's where

Okay, I can't help it - it's my alma mater. And I don't even follow basketball that much, although it's always been the Davidson sport of choice, and the games were always exciting to watch. From ESPN's Page 2 (written by Anna K. Clemmons, an alumna):

For most of my post-collegiate life, whenever someone asks me where I went to college, I answer in two parts. "Davidson College … it's outside of Charlotte in North Carolina." Why the geographical tag? Because few people outside the Tar Heel state have heard of the small, liberal arts college 30 minutes from the Queen City.

But thanks to a guard named Stephen Curry, a coach named Bob McKillop and a team of hard-working, strong-willed players, that changed this weekend. Led by point guard Jason Richards (who led the nation in assists this season) and Curry (70 points in two tournament games), 10th-seeded Davidson took down Gonzaga and then Georgetown in the early rounds of the NCAA tournament in Raleigh, N.C. . .

Read it all.

AAC weekly update from Bishop Anderson

The AAC weekly update from Bishop David Anderson, via email [boldface mine]:

Beloved in Christ,

One of our lead stories this week centers on the agreement of the Rev. Brian Cox to cooperate with the Episcopal Church in their attempt to wrest control of the Diocese of San Joaquin back from Bishop John-David Schofield and the parishes that have chosen to realign with the Anglican Province of the Southern Cone. There is a particular disappointment among the orthodox that this former brother in arms would agree to such a collaboration. The American Anglican Council would urge Fr. Cox and any others who are being asked to participate in such endeavors to turn aside. History judges the collaborationists harshly, and his interests in bringing so-called reconciliation to the areas encompassing San Joaquin is ill-advised and focused on the wrong people. Bishop Schofield addresses the points in his own words quite adequately.

On the opposite coast of the United States, the TEC diocese of North Carolina passed the following resolution:

ON THE INCLUSION OF ALL PERSONS REGARDLESS OF SEXUAL ORIENTATION AS FULL AND EQUAL PARTICIPANTS IN THE LIFE OF CHRIST'S CHURCH.

Resolved by the 192nd Annual Convention of the Episcopal Diocese of North Carolina, that the Diocese continue to demonstrate its commitment to radical hospitality and, that in accordance with the House of Bishops' Statement, Fall 2007, we "proclaim the Gospel that in Christ all God's children, including gay and lesbian persons, are full and equal participants in the life of Christ's Church" by:

1) Urging the Archbishop of Canterbury to extend to the duly elected and consecrated Bishop of New Hampshire an invitation to full participation in the Lambeth Conference of 2008;

2) Encouraging our Deputies to the 2009 General Convention to ensure compliance with Title III. Canon I. Section 2, which supports the full and equal participation of all persons regardless of sexual orientation in all aspects of the Church's ministries, lay and ordained;

3) Encouraging the General Convention to call for the development of public liturgies for the blessing of same sex unions.

As one orthodox North Carolina representative protested, "This extraordinary document encapsulates the agenda of the lesbian and gay communities. ‘ALL PERSONS REGARDLESS OF SEXUAL ORIENTATION’ would certainly appear to include those whose sexual orientation compels them to seek heterosexual sex, homosexual sex, sex with boys, girls, young children, or even animals. There are absolutely no exclusions or limits listed."

He then goes on to rightly ask, "Has our religion truly come to the point where there are no personal moral constraints whatsoever, and the only good is what lesbians and gays deem it to be?" Aside from continuing to push for Bishop Gene Robinson to be invited officially to the Lambeth 2008 Conference, full enfranchisement of all sexual behaviors, and public liturgies for same sex unions, the telling line of the resolution is the title itself.

Because most of TEC’s upper leadership on down to many, many parish rectors and staff priests no longer believe that the Holy Scriptures are, in the words of 1 Timothy 3:16, "God breathed", that is inspired by the Holy Spirit, those leaders believe that the Word of God can be reshaped and re-understood in light of our current culture. The Episcopal Church has no lamp to light their way. The sinful behavior of sexual relations outside of traditional marriage and relations involving same gender partners is nothing but the beginning of a strange journey into a different, non-Christian religion having some of the outward form of the former but a corrupted content that does not lead to eternal life with the Creator.

If the homosexual relationships are just the beginning, what is to follow? All the historic perversions of what God created and called good are following closely. Bisexual behavior, behavior with underage individuals, cross dressing and gender switching are included in the Diocese of North Carolina's resolution: "the inclusion of all persons regardless of sexual orientation as full and equal participants in the life of Christ's church." Sexual orientation is a catch-all phrase, leaving the door open for the rest of the crowd to follow along.

I can only ask, "Is this a church you want your children and grandchildren to be exposed to?" In this regard, I call your attention to the included New York Times story about pedophilia in a New Haven, Connecticut Episcopal Church and how accommodating the church was to that horrible behavior. Other articles elsewhere in the news pick up on the Diocese of Minnesota's employment of a sexual predator and the cover up they have used (see the story here, the diocesan response here, and one priest's reaction to the diocesan response).

Elsewhere in the news we are shocked to see that TEC’s Executive Council has reassigned investment income from trust funds to be used for activities (which would include litigation) inside the dioceses of TEC which have or are planning to depart. In their own words, the Executive Council says, "We will hold clergy leaders accountable to their vows to uphold the doctrine, discipline and worship of this Church, and lay leadership accountable to the fiduciary responsibilities of the offices they hold. Up to $500,000 of income from trust funds will be made available in the calendar year 2008 to support the mission work of the Diocese of San Joaquin and similarly situated dioceses." Because the references are directly to holding clergy and lay leaders accountable for their vows and fiduciary responsibility and since, as of now, there are few ways to hold the laity responsible except through civil litigation, we see this as an allocation of funds that could go to genuine mission work elsewhere being used to sustain the litigation and punishment of clergy and laity within departing dioceses.

Several questions need to be asked. What are the trust funds’ designations for the funds being raided of their income? Are there restrictions, or are the income proceeds free to be raided? With all of the talk in TEC about Millennium Development Goals, how can TEC justify spending half a million dollars on litigation to punish clergy and laity who only want to depart with what they and their ancestors paid for? Since the Seabury-Western Theological Seminary (a TEC seminary) is having to close its doors due to finances, could not the $500,000 help the seminary stay afloat, or is it more important to sue people than to train people for ministry? Inquiring minds would like to know. As much as the Episcopal Church constantly emphasizes the vow of clergy to conform to the doctrine, discipline and worship of the Church (TEC), what is overlooked is that imbedded in that ordination vow is the adjoining statement by the priest,"...I solemnly declare that I do believe the Holy Scripture of the Old and New Testaments to be the Word of God, and to contain all things necessary to salvation..."

How is it that in their accusations against the orthodox, TEC leadership can forget "the Holy Scripture of the Old and New Testaments to be the Word of God, and to contain all things necessary to salvation" and only remember the "doctrine, discipline, and worship" part? Is not the doctrine, discipline and worship fully dependent on the prior statement being true, not only for the ordinand, but for the bishop doing the laying on of hands?

I suppose the partial good news is the American Anglican Council and several orthodox retired TEC bishops asked for full disclosure of where the litigation money has come from, and we got a partial answer: in 2008 some of it will come from invaded trust funds’ income. We still want to know where the rest of the litigation money is coming from to pay David Booth Beers and his law firm to sue orthodox Anglicans. We know the Diocese of Virginia has already spent about $1 million and has taken out another $1 million line of credit to sue the Northern Virginia churches. They could spend more than that in the appeals process. The Diocese of Virginia borrowed the money, has spent it, will have to pay it back, and now it needs more money to sue. Virginia will learn that the devil has an unquenchable appetite, not only for the souls of the revisionists, but for their money as well.

Finally we note that some correspondence is suggesting that the Archbishop of Canterbury should step down to save the Communion. Suggestions such as these, while very much to the point following the "Sharia law" outrage, to name only one, miss the point that Dr. Williams serves at the pleasure of the Queen of England, and not at anyone else’s. Only if and when the Queen herself becomes concerned enough about the honor and stability of the Church and the office of the Archbishop, will anything happen. The AAC will thus note the problems, but will not suggest what actions the Archbishop should take career-wise.

Blessings and Peace in Christ Jesus,

The Rt. Rev. David C. Anderson, Sr.
President & CEO of the AAC