BREAKING NEWS: Episcopal Church finally defines "Heresy"

Silly me. This being the first time in six General Conventions of the Episcopal Church that I have not been a deputy, I thought it started tomorrow. I will fly out there (Anaheim, CA) later this week; but tonight I was at home, having a wonderful time.

Wisconsin this time of year is the kind of place God had in mind when he created the Garden of Eden. My wife and some friends (one of them a visiting professor in our DMin program at Nashotah House) and I had a leisurely dinner (2 1/2 hours) at a restaurant on one of our local lakes. Sipping red wine and sparkling water, enjoying the lake view and and a beautiful sunset in perfect (not near-perfect--absolutely perfect!) weather, engaging in stimulating conversation over delectable food--one of the finest evenings I have had in a long time.

Then I came home, switched on the computer and saw that the General Convention had begun this evening, and that the Episcopal Church (or at least its leadership) had done something that they hadn't been able to do in all the General Conventions I attended as a deputy. They finally defined heresy.

Or at least the Presiding Bishop did. The defining moment came in an opening address, which the Rev. Philip Ashey, reports as follows:

Then the Presiding Bishop of TEC took the stand. She spoke about the crisis facing The Episcopal Church. “Crisis is always a remarkable opportunity,” she said. Speaking from her own experience as a pilot, she said it is a time to “aviate, navigate, and then communicate,” in that order. Always keep the plane flying through the crisis—even when you are not sure where you are.

She described the essential crisis within the Gospels as Jesus’ decision to set his face toward Jerusalem, and likened the decisions of this 76th General Convention to that decision to set one’s face toward Jerusalem.

And then in a cold, calm, defiant and defining voice she said, "The overarching connection in all of these crises has to do with the great Western heresy - that we can be saved as individuals, that any of us alone can be in right relationship with God. It's caricatured in some quarters by insisting that salvation depends on reciting a specific verbal formula about Jesus. That individualist focus is a form of idolatry, for it puts me and my words in the place that only God can occupy, at the center of existence, as the ground of all being. That heresy is one reason for the theme of this Convention."

Now, to give the Presiding Bishop the benefit of the doubt (See, I really am feeling good this evening!), what she may have meant is: "It is wrong for us to concentrate solely on the individual aspects of salvation. As a Church we are called to life in community, and at this General Convention we are going to concentrate on what we do as a Church together. That is why we have chosen 'Ubuntu' as our theme."

For those who haven't kept up with the choice of this year's theme for General Convention, one way of defining "Ubuntu" is this quotation from Archbishop Desmond Tutu:

One of the sayings in our country is Ubuntu - the essence of being human. Ubuntu speaks particularly about the fact that you can't exist as a human being in isolation. It speaks about our interconnectedness. You can't be human all by yourself, and when you have this quality - Ubuntu - you are known for your generosity.

We think of ourselves far too frequently as just individuals, separated from one another, whereas you are connected and what you do affects the whole world. When you do well, it spreads out; it is for the whole of humanity.

Okay, perhaps the Presiding Bishop is talking about "the Social Gospel" updated for the 21st century.

But that is not what the Presiding Bishop said. She used the "H" word--a rarity for a contemporary Episcopalian--and she appeared to aim the word squarely at those who believe in the necessity of an individual confession of Jesus Christ as Lord for salvation.

This, of course, would seem to run contrary to the following passage of Scripture as well as several others:

But what does it say? "The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart" (that is, the word of faith that we proclaim); because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved. For the Scripture says, "Everyone who believes in him will not be put to shame." For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, bestowing his riches on all who call on him. For "everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved."

How then will they call on him in whom they have not believed? And how are they to believe in him of whom they have never heard? And how are they to hear without someone preaching? And how are they to preach unless they are sent? As it is written, "How beautiful are the feet of those who preach the good news!" But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Isaiah says, "Lord, who has believed what he has heard from us?" So faith comes from hearing, and hearing through the word of Christ. (Romans 10:8-17)

(This passage, incidentally, sets out not only the means by which individuals are saved, but also the Church's message as it does mission.)

So either the Presiding Bishop is being provocative (Google the words "mother Jesus" to see a long list of entries about a previous example of the same), or else the biblical illiteracy that has long been the bane of Episcopalians has now become a requirement for continued membership.

And General Convention is only just beginning.
 

Rising debt may be next crisis

Economists point to rising debt as next crisis
Higher taxes and reduced federal benefits, services may be result

WASHINGTON - The Founding Fathers left one legacy not celebrated on Independence Day but which affects us all. It's the national debt.

The country first got into debt to help pay for the Revolutionary War. Growing ever since, the debt stands today at a staggering $11.4 trillion — equivalent to about $37,000 for each and every American. And it's expanding by over $1 trillion a year.

The mountain of debt easily could become the next full-fledged economic crisis without firm action from Washington, economists of all stripes warn.

Read the whole article here or here.

"Without firm action from Washington..." the article says. Folks, it is WASHINGTON that is getting us into this mess! -- The problem our government is presenting us with right now is: Reckless spending we cannot afford for change we do not need!

How could "Washington" prevent the debt crisis? Stop the omnibus energy spending bill known as "Cap and Trade" or "Cap and Tax" already passed by the House of Representatives and being debated in the Senate right now. If there are any energy measures in that bill worth considering, they should be considered one at a time and not in a multi-trillion dollar spending bill that no member of Congress has actually read but that would put heavy new taxes on energy at every level and spend money on hairbrained schemes that will result in no new energy.

At the same time, we must stop the nationalization of our health care. The often quoted figure of 40 million Americans who lack health insurance is a myth. There are millions of people who should be excluded from that tally, including: those who aren’t American citizens, people who can afford their own insurance, and people who already qualify for existing government coverage but haven’t signed up.

Government statistics also show 45 percent of those without insurance will have insurance again within four months after job transitions.

Accounting for all those factors, one prominent study places the total for the long-term uninsured as low as 8.2 million – a very different reality than the media and national health care advocates claim.

Furthermore, being without health care insurance does not mean that individuals lack access to health care. Most hospitals and health care providers make provisions for treating the uninsured.

We must stop the government take over of our health care system that would diminish the quality of health care available to everyone and put several thousand dollars of additional taxes on every American and drastically increase our national debt.

Right now the overall debt is now slightly over 80% of the annual output of the entire U.S. economy, as measured by the gross domestic product--and this is BEFORE the impact of the schemes the Obama administration wants to implement.

Let me say it again--the problem is:

Reckless spending we cannot afford for change we do not need!

Even if you have never written your elected representatives and senators before, do it today.
 

A 'coup' in Honduras? Nonsense.

A comment from Jonathan on my last piece on Honduras pointed to this piece in the Christian Science Monitor in which writer Octavio Sánchez essentially corroborates the position I took regarding this week's developments in that country:

A 'coup' in Honduras? Nonsense.
Don't believe the myth. The arrest of President Zelaya represents the triumph of the rule of law.
By Octavio Sánchez
from the July 2, 2009 edition

Tegucigalpa, Honduras - Sometimes, the whole world prefers a lie to the truth. The White House, the United Nations, the Organization of American States, and much of the media have condemned the ouster of Honduran President Manuel Zelaya this past weekend as a coup d'état.

That is nonsense.

In fact, what happened here is nothing short of the triumph of the rule of law.

The piece goes on to give a very brief and clear assessment of what happened in Honduras this past Sunday and quotes the Honduran Constitution and its provisions that were violated by then President Zelaya, triggering his removal by the Honduran Supreme Court and the Congress.

The perspective presented by Sanchez is so compelling that I was tempted to quote his entire column here. But out of respect for copyright, I strongly encourage you to follow this link to the article in its original location on the Christian Science Monitor website.
 

Obama on Honduras: Getting it wrong--again

The Obama administration said Wednesday it has suspended joint military operations with Honduras to protest a coup that forced President Manuel Zelaya into exile. The U.S. withheld stronger action in hopes of negotiating a peaceful return of the country's elected leader.

The administration appeared to be counting on the threat of Honduras having its OAS membership suspended as leverage in getting Zelaya back in power. While the administration joined the OAS in calling for Zelaya's unconditional return, with no limits on his presidential powers, it also seemed open to some form of compromise.

I have been absolutely aghast (though not terribly surprised) at the position the Obama administration has taken on the recent deposition of the president of Honduras--a position that puts Obama squarely in line with dictators Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro. News accounts of how this episode in Honduras began are now falling off the radar of the mainstream media. But Reuters provides this bit of background:

World leaders from President Barack Obama to Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez have told the new rulers of the Central American country to restore Zelaya, a leftist who was toppled by the army on Sunday and sent into exile after a dispute over presidential term limits.

Translation: "a dispute over presidential term limits" means Zelaya was trying to make himself into a dictator, and he was deposed for his attempt to subvert the Honduran Constitution by the military with the support of the Honduran people, the Congress, and the courts. As the Reuters account also states:

Public support for Zelaya, a wealthy businessman, had dropped as low as 30 percent in recent months, with many Hondurans uncomfortable over his tilt to the left in a country with a longtime conservative, pro-Washington position.

Yes, Zelaya had been tilting toward the left--in the direction of Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro--and why shouldn't he? Leftist leaders from Latin America are now on the White House "A" List. They're best buds with Obama!

The poor Honduran people who have been faithful allies of the United States for decades haven't gotten the message that there is a new Socialist Sheriff in Washington. "Communism good; capitalism bad."

Now, of course, with Obama signaling that he wants to see Zelaya returned to power, the Organization of American States (OAS) can clearly tell which way the wind is blowing and is making threats against Honduras. Worse still, Chavez may take Obama's signal as an okay to use military intervention to restore Zelaya to power.

So, thanks to the President of the United States, we may witness a war in Central America to insert a Socialist dictator into power and to transfer a nation that was once the US' staunchest ally in the region into the camp of Chavez and Castro. Is anybody paying attention?

Pray for the people of Honduras!
 

Spare me the gurus, please.

Reading the news on Sunday can be a trying experience. The media usually think we have had enough of finance and politics during the working days of the week; and so, except for a couple of political talk shows on the television networks, the print and internet media usually think it is time for feature stories--the sort we can read while enjoying a leisurely Sunday brunch and come away feeling that, more than mere facts, we have perspective!

So, in contrast to Monday's stories that will usually give me a preview of what is to come during the week, whether on Wall Street or Capitol Hill, midweek stories that tell me about unfolding events, or Friday's stories that give me a wrap of the week's developments, Sunday's news is aimed at giving me culture.

This is, at least for me, often a trying experience. As one who generally tends to regard contemporary culture with a mixture of suspicion and detatched amusement, and who feels there is wisdom in the old adage that Christians are to be in the world but not of the world, as a youth I memorized 1 John 2:15-17,

"Do not love the world or anything in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. For everything in the world—the cravings of sinful man, the lust of his eyes and the boasting of what he has and does—comes not from the Father but from the world. The world and its desires pass away, but the man who does the will of God lives forever."

Surveying the news headlines on a typical Sunday only tends to reinforce the wisdom of my conviction.

Today's stories are all aimed at giving us perspective on the death of Michael Jackson. I got on a plane on Thursday just as the news of Farah Fawcett's death was blaring over the airport television screens and got off that same plane greeted by the news that Michael Jackson had died. "How sad!" I thought. "A brave and compassionate woman's heroic fight against cancer (from which we all could learn something) has ended. But that news is going to be quickly eclipsed by the death of a self-destructive freak and child molester."

And sure enough, we are in full eclipse. Fawcett and Jackson died on the same day, yet by today Farah is nowhere to be seen, but the headlines are awash with stories on Jackson, especially dealing with the role that prescription drugs may have played in his death. It all looks eerily familiar. My wife and I lived two blocks from Graceland when Elvis Presley died. We've seen this before.

Article # 1 tells me that the Rev. Jesse Jackson (no relation to Michael) revealed that Michael Jackson's family wanted a second, private autopsy of the pop superstar because of unanswered questions about how he died.

"It's abnormal," Jesse Jackson said from Chicago a day after visiting the Jackson family. "We don't know what happened. Was he injected and with what? All reasonable doubt should be addressed."

Well I am certainly glad that the Rev. Mr. Jackson is there to hog the spotlight provide pastoral care. All the police, doctors, lawyers, agents, and real clergy surrounding the Jackson family were obviously incapable of dealing with this situation until Jesse arrived.

Article #2 takes me to a video of "medical doctor and spiritual advisor" Deepak Chopra giving his take on Michael Jackson's death, complete with photos taken of the two men together, in one photo even posing together wearing matching hats. How cute!

But the main feature on MSNBC, on this Sunday when the media wants to give me "perspective," is this story:

On marriage: Let’s call the whole thing off
Author Sandra Tsing Loh is ending her marriage. Is it time you did, too?

The story features a short video of Sandra Tsing Loh and psychiatrist Gail Saltz talking with TODAY’s Meredith Vieira about "the case against marriage" suggesting that "marriage made sense prior to 1900 when we were an agrarian society" but in today's more sophisticated, gender neutral society, marriage is outmoded--all because this particular woman who happens to be an author has decided that her marriage is over. And she is being held out as a guru for the rest of us. But not to fear: the story ends on an upbeat, hopeful note about marriage (the media know better than to depress their readers too much) and is followed by (surprise!) a series of stories on how couples can save their marriages and enhance their sex lives (with commentary from more media gurus), ending with a story on "shopping for a perfect husband" that concludes that a woman is better off with "an average looking guy who does the dishes." Okay, that's it. Guru overload. Closing my web browser NOW!

But since it is Sunday, the day of Christ's Resurrection, could there be a better perspective? Let's look first and foremost at the perspective of the One who created us:

"To God belong wisdom and power;
counsel and understanding are his.

What he tears down cannot be rebuilt;
the man he imprisons cannot be released.

If he holds back the waters, there is drought;
if he lets them loose, they devastate the land.

To him belong strength and victory;
both deceived and deceiver are his.

He leads counselors away stripped
and makes fools of judges. (Job 12:13-17)

How do we have God's perspective on our lives?

Remember your word to your servant,
for you have given me hope.
My comfort in my suffering is this:
Your promise preserves my life.

The arrogant mock me without restraint,
but I do not turn from your law.

I remember your ancient laws, O LORD,
and I find comfort in them.

Indignation grips me because of the wicked,
who have forsaken your law.

Your decrees are the theme of my song
wherever I lodge.

In the night I remember your name, O LORD,
and I will keep your law.

This has been my practice:
I obey your precepts.

You are my portion, O LORD;
I have promised to obey your words.
I have sought your face with all my heart;
be gracious to me according to your promise.

I have considered my ways
and have turned my steps to your statutes.

I will hasten and not delay
to obey your commands.

Though the wicked bind me with ropes,
I will not forget your law.

At midnight I rise to give you thanks
for your righteous laws.

I am a friend to all who fear you,
to all who follow your precepts.

The earth is filled with your love, O LORD;
teach me your decrees. (Psalm 119:49-64)

So, spare me the gurus, please. And in the words of the gospel song, "Give me Jesus!"

(I hope you enjoy the beautiful video.)


 

Rebuild My Church!

Traveling through Italy the past couple of weeks on Nashotah House's Archbishop Michael Ramsey Society pilgrimage, we spent a couple of days in Assisi, home to St. Francis. I found myself drawn to return more than once to the church of St. Clare, where, in a side chapel, hangs the large crucifix that once hung in the church in San Damiano. It was before this crucifix, in the summer of the year 1206, that Francis had the experience that sealed his conversion.

Francis had always possessed a heart that was concerned for God and for others, but he began to be increasingly convicted that his father's obsession with money, his mother's concerns for his health, and his own desires for sumptuous foods, lavish clothes, and extravagant parties were something he needed to renounce in response to the call of God for his life.

Francis frequently took walks in the countryside around Assisi, and one of his favorite paths took him past the church of San Damiano, a tumbling down, deserted chapel halfway down a steep hill outside the walls of the city. In this decrepit place hung a large, almost life size painted icon of Jesus on the Cross.

One summer day, in 1206, Francis was walking in the vicinity of San Damiano when he felt an interior tug of the Spirit to go inside to pray. Obeying the inner voice, Francis entered and fell on his knees before the familiar icon, his own spirit alert to what the Lord might wish to convey.

In eager anticipation, Francis looked up into the serene face of the crucified Lord, and prayed this prayer: "Most High, glorious God," he prayed, "cast your light into the darkness of my heart. Give me, Lord, right faith, firm hope, perfect charity, and profound humility, with wisdom and perception, so that I may carry out what is truly Your holy will. Amen." Ever more quietly he repeated the prayer, lost in devotion and wonder before the image of his crucified Lord.

Then, in the quietness, Francis heard Jesus speaking to him from the Cross: "Go, Francis, and repair my house, which as you can see, is falling into ruin." Another translation gives these words as, "Francis, don't you see that my house is being destroyed? Go, then, and rebuild it for me." In short, "Rebuild My Church!"

So Francis looked around at the crumbling church of San Damiano, gathered some of his friends together and rebuilt it. Then they went out and began restoring other church buildings in the vicinity of Assisi that were in need of repair. Only gradually did Francis realize that "rebuild my church" meant to reform the institution, to rebuild it by witnessing to the truth of the faith and calling people to renewed faithfulness to Christ and commitment to His mission.

As I spent time in Assisi last week, I had the opportunity to reflect on Jesus' call to Francis and what those words might mean for me today. Certainly as we look around we see a Church that is in need of repair and rebuilding--whether it is the institutional churches of "mainline Christianity" in America, or the Church as it exists in areas of the world that are deemed "post-Christian," or churches of all types in every place that are wracked by materialism, hedonism, apathy, and lack of commitment.

I believe that, in the midst of these circumstances, God is calling faithful Christians to rebuild the Church, (1) by renewing their own witness to the truth of the Christian faith, (2) by reflecting God's holiness and love to each other and especially to those who need to know Jesus as their Savior and Lord, (3) by giving visible expression to the unity of all faithful Christians whenever and wherever possible, and (4) by being the Church even when the institutional churches of which they are a part may fail at that same calling.

Almighty Father, whose blessed Son before his passion prayed
for his disciples that they might be one, as you and he are one:
Grant that your Church, being bound together in love and
obedience to you, may be united in one body by the one Spirit,
that the world may believe in him whom you have sent, your
Son Jesus Christ our Lord; who lives and reigns with you, in
the unity of the Holy Spirit, one God, now and for ever. Amen.

 

No Other Religion

Recently, I have been following the story of how the Christian Children's Fund is changing its name to ChildFund International--announced by their board as "a new strategy and globally unified name and brand to help us reach more children, more effectively."

Now never mind the jargon in that quotation (what the heck does "globally unified name and brand" actually mean?), or the new name which consists of two words--both capitalized--jammed together without a space (a currently popular branding technique that will look as dated as a Formica dinette 30 years from now). For that matter never mind the fact that this organization is dropping the word "Christian" from its name, as though it were some last vestige of 19th century colonialism (which is precisely what the politically correct crowd would have us believe). The point I want to make has to do with the mere fact that organizations such as the Christian Children's Fund even exist in our world.

A few days later, I happened to read about another organization, known as Children International, which has been in existence for about as long as the newly-branded ChildFund International (about 70 years). (Does anyone besides me see a lot of confusion down the road for these two, similarly-named organizations?) Regardless of the naming disaster, both these organizations apparently do a lot of good.

Then there are two organizations I personally support, Compassion International and World Vision. Then there is a whole host of organizations I have only heard of and cannot recommend: Just try Googling the words, "child" or "children" and "support," and you'll see what I mean. The list is almost endless.

But notice one thing: All of these organizations can date their founding to the work of Christians in generations gone by. Can anyone point to a Buddhist, Muslim, or Hindu organization that does this kind of work?

NO OTHER RELIGION--not Buddhist, Hindu, Muslim, Shinto, etc. (nor any secular organization)--is as responsible for founding ministries to children, orphanages, hospitals, or schools--or contemporary efforts to rehabilitate drug addicts, liberate women and children from the sex trade, or guarantee basic human rights as are Christian churches.

Perhaps there is something different in the religion whose Founder taught us to "love one another" and who gave His own life out of love to free everyone who calls on His name from sin and darkness.

Think about that the next time someone tells you there is no difference between Christianity and other religions, or a secularist acts as if there is no value in Christianity.

"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life." John 3:16

"Greater love has no one than this, that he lay down his life for his friends." John 15:13

"A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another." John 13:34

 

Nashotah House confers three honorary degrees; J.I. Packer addresses graduates

Good and accurate reporting from Episcopal Life Online regarding the Nashotah House Commencement:

Nashotah House confers three honorary degrees
May 21, 2009
[Nashotah House] Nashotah House Theological Seminary in Wisconsin awarded three Doctor of Divinity degrees, honoris causa, during its May 14 commencement ceremony.

The degree recipients were Bishop Suffragan Paul E. Lambert of the Episcopal Diocese of Dallas; the Rev. Jonathan Baker, principal of Pusey House at Oxford University; and the Rev. J. I. Packer, Anglican theologian, author and executive editor of Christianity Today.

A prolific writer and lecturer, Packer is perhaps best known for his 1973 book Knowing God, now considered a modern classic. He has also served as general editor for the English Standard Version of the Bible and was a contributor to the watershed Evangelicals and Catholics Together: Toward a Common Mission, the ecumenical project launched by Charles Colson and the late Fr. Richard John Neuhaus. Packer has also collaborated on books with Thomas Howard and Thomas Oden, and remains a seminal thinker in contemporary Anglicanism.
[...]

Read it all.
 

A Deposit of Hope

We have just had an extraordinary Commencement at Nashotah House--actually an entire week filled with a golf tournament on the world-renowned championship courses at Kohler, Wisconsin, our annual Alumni Mass and Reunion, an Alumni/student football game, our Commencement and Trustees meeting, followed by the Ordination of five of our graduates to the priesthood on Saturday, and the Baptism of one the daughter of one of our graduates on Sunday morning--not to mention dinners, receptions, and a lot of fun and fellowship in between.

Highlights of the week: Conferring honorary doctoral degrees on Dr. J.I. Packer, who served as our Commencement speaker, Bp. Paul Lambert, an alumnus and Suffragan Bishop of Dallas, and Fr. Jonathan Baker, the Principal of Pusey House, Oxford. Now think about that for a minute--simultaneously conferring degrees on one of the Anglican Communion's most noted Evangelicals and the Principal of one of the Communion's leading Anglo-Catholic institutions--yet both these men can find their essential unity in the Gospel. If there is a hopeful model for an Anglican future, this is it!

I have been too busy to blog--and will be for the next few days, as we have our year-end faculty conference. But Father Dan Martins has recounted his impressions of his return to his seminary alma mater over at his blog in a post entitled: A Deposit of Hope. Fr. Martins has captured exactly what we hope Nashotah House is and will continue to be. Thanks be to God! And keep us in your prayers.

PERFIDY!

A letter to the The Most Rev. and Rt. Hon. Rowan Williams, Archbishop of Canterbury:

Your Grace,

A statement released today by Professors Christopher Seitz, Philip Turner, and Ephraim Radner, and Attorney Mark McCall states: "Friday’s session of the Anglican Consultative Council is an embarrassment to Anglicans everywhere, and a sad display of procedural confusion."

I would go further than saying "procedural confusion." It is, as reports from Professor Stephen Noll and others are calling it: PERFIDY. It is a betrayal of every Anglican who has looked to the Covenant process to bring desperately needed order to our life as a Communion.

I urge you to take note of the two recommendations made by Prof. Seitz, et al in their statement:

(1) This issue must be re-visited immediately by the ACC and voted upon in a lawful and proper manner during this meeting. The alternative is moving forward with lasting questions as to the legitimacy of the entire process.

(2)An explanation must be offered by those in charge of these proceedings, including the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Chairman of the ACC, as to how such manifestly improper procedures were permitted to unfold from the outset of Friday’s session and, indeed, of ACC-14 itself.

If lawful and proper action on the Covenant is not forthcoming from this meeting of the Council, the only appropriate response is for the Churches of the Communion to begin themselves the process of adopting the Ridley Cambridge Text."

It is painfully obvious to observers in many quarters that the continuation of the Communion depends on your actions in this matter.

Respectfully yours in Christ,

The Very Rev. Robert S. Munday, Ph.D.
Dean and President
Professor of Systematic Theology
Nashotah House Theological Seminary


NOTE: Let the Archbishop of Canterbury know your opinion! You can do it here: http://www.archbishopofcanterbury.org/1531?navid=102&formid=10.