Article 165 of the draft Penal Code, which was approved last week by the Chamber of Deputies and promptly forwarded to the Senate for further scrutiny, criminalises abortion but outlines four exceptional cases under which it may be permitted by a court of law.
The article stipulates that there is no criminal liability for a woman who causes her own abortion and a medical doctor who helps a woman to abort provided that any of the following conditions are met. They are; in case of pregnancy as a result of incest, rape, forced marriage, and/or when the continuation of a pregnancy seriously jeopardises the health of the unborn baby or the pregnant woman.
But Rwaje insisted that, rather than accepting abortion under those conditions, measures should be taken to address the four highlighted causes “since they are the problem and not abortion”.
He argued that some people were also born as a result of terrible circumstances, like rape, forced marriages or incest, among others, but have gone on to become useful citizens to the nation.
Retired Anglican Archbishop, Most Reverend Emmanuel Kolini, said abortion was wrong, adding that pouring innocent blood brings terrible conditions on a nation.
He, however, couldn’t commit himself regarding clause four of Article 165, which permits abortion to save a life.
Asked his position in case a woman who has been advised by medical personnel to abort due to the fact that the health of mother/baby was at great risk if they continued with the pregnancy, Kolini said the decision should be between the two parents.
“The decision should be made by the two parents of the child and a medical doctor. If they are uncertain about the decision, they should ask for God’s help,” he said.
Asked the same question, Archbishop Rwaje couldn’t also commit himself on whether he would advise a woman in that situation to terminate the pregnancy or not, only insisting that abortion is wrong.
Bishop Mbonyitege, however, stuck to his guns, saying “abortion is killing and therefore wrong”.
Archbishop Rwaje warned that secularism was knocking at the door of the country, so Rwandans should be very careful not to let it in.
Anglican bishop, Louis Muvunyi, of Kigali Diocese, Rwanda is down the same lane the US took when it started legalising abortion “bit-by-bit.”
The Rwandan House of Bishops just issued another letter. The upshot of it is:
- AMiA clergy have more time than AMiA bishops to make a decision about where they are headed. The bishops must decide within weeks (meaning April), while the clergy have until August to decide.
- An Inaugural General Assembly for PEAR USA clergy and laity will occur in August, at which time the charter for the Missionary District will be ratified.
- PEAR is working with ACNA to establish how the new Missionary District will function within ACNA.
Here is the text:
April 10, 2012
To the Clergy of Rwanda serving the work of the Gospel in North America: Greetings in the Name of the Lord Jesus, the Risen Christ and the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world!
We write to clarify some important questions that remain after our March 29 Resolution and April 2 Communiqué.
As a result of our March 29 Resolution, a Missionary District of PEAR in North America has been established. We are currently working with members of the PEAR‐USA Steering Team to create a temporary Charter for Ministry which will define the mission and structure of the Missionary District. Once we have approved the recommended Charter we will make it available to you. This Charter will be ratified through a proper process at an Inaugural General Assembly (of laity, clergy, and bishops) for the Missionary District which we hope to host in early August.
Members of the PEAR House of Bishops are also working with leaders from ACNA that Archbishop Robert Duncan has appointed and members of the PEAR‐USA Steering Team in the hope of establishing protocols that will govern the Missionary District as a sub‐ jurisdiction of the ACNA.
It is our clear intention that the Missionary District will be the only option for clergy and churches in North America wishing stay canonically resident in PEAR. As the details of the Charter for Ministry and the sub‐jurisdictional protocols become clear, we hope that all North American clergy resident in PEAR, along with their churches, will eventually join the Missionary District. A process of formal affiliation with the Missionary District will be described in the Charter. Until the Charter is approved, any North American clergy resident in PEAR can affiliate with the Missionary District by a simple declaration of desire and intent. (This declaration should be communicated in writing to the PEARUSA office. They will pass on further instruction for affiliation and participation for both clergy and churches.)
However, we understand that some clergy currently resident and in good standing in PEAR have chosen, with their churches, to begin the process of transferring to dioceses within the ACNA or other Anglican jurisdictions. Bishop Terrell Glenn is coordinating these requests for letters dimissory on my behalf. This process should continue as needed, and we are fully supportive of those moving directly into the ACNA and other Anglican jurisdictions.
We also understand that some clergy and churches may choose to remain affiliated with the Anglican Mission in the Americas. They are free to do so. Again, we will supply those clergy with letters dimissory to another Anglican jurisdiction upon request.
As per our April 2 communiqué, the bishops of the Anglican Mission who resigned in December have been asked to declare the ecclesiastical jurisdiction to which they wish to be translated within the next few weeks. However, we understand that clergy and churches require additional time to make this decision. Therefore, all PEAR clergy in North America must make a clear decision about either affiliating with the Missionary District or transferring directly to the ACNA or another Anglican jurisdiction by August
In summary, as you come to understand God’s direction for you, please send all requests in writing:
• For those who desire letters dimissory to be sent to a diocese in the ACNA or any other Anglican jurisdiction, to Archbishop Onesphore Rwaje, c/o Bishop Terrell____
• For affiliation with the PEAR Missionary District, to Archbishop Onesphore
Rwaje, c/o the PEARUSA ___
It is important that you are aware of one additional deadline: We anticipate the Inaugural General Assembly for the Missionary District to take place in early August. The proposed deadline for submitting lay and clergy delegates, which will be explained in the Charter, will be no later than thirty days prior to the General Assembly. Clergy and churches that have not decided to affiliate with the Missionary District at least thirty days prior to the General Assembly will be welcome to attend, but they will not have voice and vote.
We trust that this answers important questions and clarifies the possible directions that lie ahead for you.
You are beloved in the Lord! You remain the focus of our prayers. May God grant you his
Spirit in full measure as you continue to proclaim the Gospel of the Risen Lord! Archbishop Onesphore Rwaje and the House of Bishops of PEAR
..many key leaders in the ACNA want us to come in as PEARUSA. The zeal for exploring our identity as an entity, for seeking to be formed as a jurisdiction, was shaped by conversations with ACNA leaders. Early on, rectors of large, mission‐minded ACNA congregations proposed: “Come in as a jurisdiction – as a unit. Bring your best to the table to help us do what we are all committed to do.” Archbishop Duncan himself spoke clearly. Sitting in a restaurant near the provincial office in Pittsburgh in early January, +Terrell Glenn asked, “How do we begin to move into a right relationship with the Anglican Church in North America?” ++Bob’s wisdom was, “Begin by being what you always thought that you were.”
Since that time, many conversations have revealed an eagerness to receive the body of churches that we currently refer to as PEARUSA into ACNA. This is not competition: it is the creative synergy that comes as like‐minded people with much in common help each other do the work of Christ. We are being invited to be a part of the big net.
PEAR USA has posted a heartfelt reflection from Bishop Barnum on the history of struggle between AMiA and ACNA here. Excerpts:
Because of this alliance, we were allowed to be fully Anglican in America with no ties to the Episcopal Church and its new gospel. And I believed this movement would grow, a movement uniting orthodox Anglicans in North America for the purpose of reaching our culture for the Lord Jesus Christ.
But what happened surprised me. I found, in those early days, the sharpest criticism AMIA received wasn’t from the “revisionists” in the Episcopal Church. It was from the orthodox. Some of the strongest evangelical bishops were dead-set against Anglican overseas provinces crossing into North America, and worse, into their own diocesan territories. In their mind, Anglican Mission in America was far from a godly response to the brazen heresy of the Episcopal Church. It was a threat that could negatively impact their own dioceses. They could lose clergy, churches, leaders, finances and strength as a united people.
We, at AMIA, made the decision to forge ahead. Like us or not, we decided to devote ourselves to “Mission: Nothing more, Nothing Less.” It was a choice not to be distracted by our detractors, keep the focus on gospel mission, and trust the Lord would bring all things together in His time and in His way.
By 2003, with the consecration of an openly gay bishop, the Episcopal Church broke from its historic Christian mooring and set a “new gospel” course most orthodox believers were unwilling to follow. Faced with uncertainty, the trail blazed by AMIA – though disregarding the ancient Christian tradition of not crossing diocesan boundaries — seemed worthy of consideration.
This was it, I thought. This was the moment for a united orthodox Anglicanism in North America to catch fire. Two archbishops had begun the work. More were coming on board as the Episcopal Church publicly shunned discipline for their actions. In a day of wild rebellious heresy, Anglicanism was alive in America.
Alive and together.
At least that’s what I thought was going to happen. But it didn’t. Instead, we split into different groupings. Some went to seek the favor of the Anglican Province of Uganda; others with Kenya; others with Nigeria; some with us in Rwanda; others to the Southern Cone and Tanzania. How was this possible? The Episcopal Church had separated from the gospel. Why were we separating from each other?
I remember preaching at a conference and making a strong appeal that we resist the temptation to divide in a day of gospel reformation. A priest came up to me afterward, patted me on the back, and told me I was arrogant to think AMIA was the answer to unite orthodox Anglicans in America. It wasn’t, he urged, and suggested we pray for each other as we go our different ways.
Our different ways?
But – are you kidding? — why do that?
And my heart grew colder.
I lost passion for a united orthodox Anglicanism in North America. I turned my full attention to the daily work of gospel mission in AMIA and to deepening our fellowship with Rwanda. By the time the “Anglican Church of North America” was born a few years later, the divisions between us had become so real in my experience that, for me, a new vision for unity felt strangely shallow and disingenuous. I was grateful, on the one hand, AMIA played a strong role in the formation of ACNA. But on the other hand, I couldn’t get past our divisions. How could AMIA and ACNA possibly reconcile until these underlying tensions between us were owned, confessed, and publicly dealt with? Isn’t that how biblical unity is forged?
Let me get this straight, I quietly protested, you refused to be part of us and now you want us to be part of you? Doesn’t that sound a little strange?
So in May 2010, when the AMIA Council of Bishops re-evaluated our relationship with ACNA, I was quick to make the decision to move to “Ministry Partner” status with no consideration of the negative impact on ACNA. What mattered to me most was that this decision strengthened AMIA and our ever-deepening fellowship in Rwanda.
Fast forward to Raleigh, January 2012, and I am face-to-face with the fact that our decision, my decision, caused hurt to my brothers and sisters in Christ in ACNA. I didn’t know that before. But far worse, I was suddenly aware of the dark, ugly condition of my own heart.
I had come to a place where I didn’t care.
- * *
“So what are you sorry about?” a questioner asked.
On the second day of the Raleigh Assembly, we held a panel discussion with Archbishop Rwaje, three Rwandan bishops, Terrell and me on stage. Before the question was asked, we’d already stated that biblical reconciliation requires us to stop blaming others. It’s imperative, we said, to examine our own hearts and confess our own sins that led to this break in relationship. That’s when the question came.
I asked for the microphone.
Archbishop Bob Duncan was sitting in the front row of the church. I knew it was not my place to speak on behalf of my colleagues in AMIA. But I could speak for me. I could own – among many things to own – my complicity in the hurt I’d caused. And this was it. The time to take first steps, baby steps.
I looked over to him. I told the congregation the story. I confessed my part in the May 2010 decision that led to deepening and widening the chasm between AMIA and ACNA. It was all too unrehearsed. I didn’t know how to say that there had been too many hurts over the last fifteen years and that for me, my heart had become cold and uncaring. For whatever reason, that didn’t come out.
I just knew to say “I am sorry for the hurt I’ve caused.” A real sorry. A real complicity.
He said it loud. He said it clear, for everyone in the congregation to hear.
“Apology received, forgiveness granted.”
- * *
An AMIA priest from the Midwest came over to me after the panel discussion. He was kind, so gentle in his approach. He wanted me to know that the May 2010 decision didn’t just hurt Christians in ACNA.
“It hurt us too,” he told me. “There’s a huge number of us in AMIA who are still confused and offended by your decision. It was even harder for us because we weren’t given voice. It was simply announced.” And with that, he smiled, hugged me, and said that today had begun the healing process. I thanked him for telling me, looked him in the eyes, and said it again because I meant it again.
“I’m sorry for the hurt I caused.”
- * *
Archbishop Rwaje and his fellow bishops of Rwanda ended the Solemn Assembly with the same kind of grace that opened our time together. He appointed a “Team”, with Bishop Terrell Glenn as our “Team Leader”, to help serve, care, and encourage clergy and churches still in the Anglican Province of Rwanda to find their way in these days of crisis and division.
He also appointed a “Task Force” with two specific goals. The first, to help those clergy and churches that wanted to go directly from his oversight straight into a diocese of ACNA. It was essential to ++Rwaje that at some point, in a few months, this transfer not simply be a “paper transaction.” Rather, he would hold a service of worship with Archbishop Duncan and fellow members of the ACNA in which these clergy and churches would be handed over with blessing from the House of Bishops of Rwanda.
A profound demonstration of unity.
The second task is meant to serve those clergy and churches that want to remain in Rwanda. By the good example of our brothers and sisters in CANA (who share full inclusion in both the Anglican Church of Nigeria and ACNA), we have precedent to both honor our relationship in Rwanda and to do everything possible to hold up the vision for a united orthodox Anglican presence in North America.
And in that unity, to go do the work we’re called to do in mission.
But this time, a radically different kind of mission. A John 13:35 mission. The kind that demands the disciples of the Lord Jesus Christ “love one another” – as He has loved us – for this is ground zero of mission work. This is how the world knows that we belong to Him and that we’re ambassadors of Him. Not in our fighting against each other, not in our divisions and schisms, but in allowing the love of God given us in Christ Jesus our Lord to reign over us. And heal us.
We must do everything to work for reconciliation in all things. It’s hard work to do. I don’t like it. I hate the way it demands me to examine my heart first, own my sins, and in humility confess them. But that’s what we do. It’s where it starts. In these days, it’s where we all must start. First steps.
Until the day comes that we hear the Lord say to us. Say to all of us…
“Apology received. Forgiveness granted.”
The two options presented to the Rwandan churches are a narrowing of the three envisioned options presented at Moving Forward Together, and they make more sense. They boil down to (1) joining ACNA outright, or (2) existing in a close relationship with ACNA on the same pattern that CANA has.
The Missionary District of Rwanda allows for a relationship with Rwanda that honors PEAR for its contribution to keeping orthodox Anglicanism alive in the USA during the last decade. It also means that clergy to clergy and congregation to congregation relationships can be maintained. It also means that these Rwandan congregations in America can work hand in glove with their local ACNA counterparts. This is how CANA is functioning on the ground in Northern Virginia. Truro and the Falls Church seem to see themselves as more a part of ACNA now, with CANA being a secondary affiliation, and this is how it should be. A future Missionary Bishop or two (lets hope its not more than that) can sit in the ACNA College of Bishops and in Rwanda at the same time (cf. Bp Dobbs and Minns).
The Missionary District means that the narrative of Africa re-evangelizing America is not lost. Both Nigeria and Rwanda continue to send missionaries to us (in a sense). This important narrative was threatened to be lost with the Pawleys Island “Missionary Society” concept.
The Jerusalem Declaration is central to the Missionary District, and this is a good thing. A definitively classical Anglican position is outlined for this District. This is a move back towards what most of us thought the AMiA was about given the Solemn Declaration. The other bullet points are clear distinctions against what AMiA had become, such as:
- Collegiality in place of a Chairman calling the shots.
- A “passion for transparency” in place of the ongoing drama over the finances of AMiA.
- Unity with ACNA, in place of rivalry and the pulling away that occurred in 2010. This breach began to be healed very publicly by Bishops Barnum and Duncan in Raleigh. This Communiqué uses the analogy of a marriage and becoming one over time, and that is a wonderful picture of what should happen. A decade from now, these recent struggles may be lost in the fog of the past as thousands of new parishes flourish in the United States.
The canons of Rwanda are being revised with the recognition that they currently do not reflect the faith and practice of PEAR. The travesty authored by Kevin Donlon will be undone, and this is a great thing for the future of GAFCON. A real disaster was averted.
Also, the Missionary District asks for “conciliar episcopal oversight” from Rwanda. This is a clear difference from the language of “reverse colonialism” and Egypt used by both Bishop Murphy and former Archbishop Kolini.
Anyone who wants to simply move to ACNA, CANA or the REC can do so with Rwanda’s blessing. This isn’t a power grab. The existing, interim structure will go out of business soon and churches will be back on track to disciple the nations. God has wrought wonderful things out of a tough situation.
PEAR USA has begun to cobble together a website. Also, the first financial report is up for all the world to see, here. What follows are a report and the FAQs from the new website:
A Visit with the PEARUSA Steering Team, February 10, 2012
May God give grace and peace as you read this report from your brothers serving Christ in the United States and Canada!
Yesterday our Steering Team had its third extended conference call since the Sacred Assembly. We are grateful for the support of our friends at Knox Seminary in providing the technology to enable us to talk across the miles.
The main substance of our conference was hearing from regional leaders who shared reports from their conversations with dozens of PEARUSA clergy over the past week. These conversations were a follow-up to an email blitz that began January 30: this linked message was sent on or shortly after January 30 to all PEARUSA clergy (all clergy whose orders are held in Rwanda) on behalf of Archbishop Onesphore Rwaje.
Although a few clergy that we called feel fully cared for in their current relationships and await further guidance through an AM bishop, most were grateful for the contact and conversation. The FAQs produced in previous weeks were helpful for some questions that arose, but many more questions about the future remain unanswered. It is clear that the biggest issue on everyone’s mind is, “What next?” In particular, “What is next for our relationship with the Anglican Church of Rwanda; and what is next in our relationship with the Anglican Church of North America?” Our urgent work lies in unraveling the answers to those questions.
Thankfully, the ball is rolling. Conversations with ACNA Archbishop Duncan and other ACNA bishops and canons are happening daily. The process for direct affiliation within existing and emerging ACNA dioceses is coming into focus, and Archbishop Rwaje has pledged full support to PEARUSA clergy and churches that choose that path. Rev Clark Lowenfield and his team are hard at work assembling the details, knowing that the steps will vary from situation to situation, from diocese to diocese. Nevertheless, a model for moving directly into ACNA is emerging and should come into focus within the next few weeks. Keep checking pearusa.org, or call Clark+.
1. What is PEARUSA?
a. PEARUSA is not a new entity: PEAR is the acronym for the Anglican Church of Rwanda. PEARUSA is simply a way to talk about and identify the US clergy who are seated in Rwanda and the churches they serve. Therefore, we are clergy and churches that seek to remain in active participation in mission and ministry under the oversight and care of the House of Bishops of Rwanda and Archbishop Onesphore Rwaje. In order to clear up confusion, we are using the name PEARUSA in an effort to reclaim and identify what we have always been. Continue reading “PEAR USA FAQs and Finances”
The highlight of my experience during Moving Forward Together was Bishop Julian Dobbs and his no-nonsense, Biblical, classically Anglican presentation based on Nehemiah. I highly encourage you to watch it all:
The statement issued at the close of Moving Forward Together listed three long-term options for parishes still affiliated with Rwanda (not the AMiA parishes):
1. Full participation in an existing diocese of ACNA
2. Remaining affiliated with PEAR while also forming a subjurisdiction of ACNA
3. Remaining affiliated with PEAR by establishing a missionary jurisdiction in North America
I would think, although I am not sure of it, that the first two options will be the most popular. Some churches may want to simply be part of the new province in North America and will move accordingly. Others may desire to have a part in ACNA and do what Archbishop Duncan called for in planting churches with Anglican 1000, still maintaining ties with our Rwandan brothers and sisters.
The option of creating a missionary jurisdiction in North America is what the AMiA was supposed to have been, before all the talk of a ‘personal prelature’ came about. What I don’t understand about that option is why PEAR would want two separate entities within the USA? Also, what would the difference be on the ground between option two and option three? I’m sure time will bring clarity to these options.
One sign of an effective conference is that it challenges you to re-examine closely held assumptions. Moving Forward Together caused me to re-examine myself on several fronts. First, on the configuration of Anglicanism in North America. Bishop Julian Dobbs challenged the gathering not to duplicate the monolithic structures of the past, encouraging us to maintain our connections with Africa. He said in part:
Our risk, even at this very early stage of our development, is that as we establish this new expression of biblical missionary Anglicanism it becomes so much an expression of the former structures that it is very difficult to observe the difference between the past and the present. Hierarchical structures, infighting, power struggles, committees, attorneys, insecurities, leaders who say one thing and do another while some take care to secure their own positions at the expense of others.
I want to prayerfully and carefully caution our new Anglican movement, let us not be complacent and reinvent the less effective structures of the past. We must be constantly vigilant against an all-too-human temptation to feel that ‘the past was good enough;’ to live in the continual ‘afterglow’ of the great acts of God in past decades. The constant, forward movement of God the Holy Spirit is ever dynamic. Relationships are new and different and this is to be celebrated.
I am humbled as a native born New Zealander and now a new American to serve as a bishop in the Church of Nigeria, [Anglican Communion] while serving as a bishop of the Anglican Church in North America by right of my standing as a Bishop in the Convocation of Anglicans in North America; a Suffragan to our Missionary Bishop, the Rt. Rev. Martyn Minns. These are unusual relationships, but they are kinship that strengthen our shared mission as Anglican Christians in the world who believe that Jesus still says ‘go and recognize our necessary and shared dependence upon Almighty God and the global Anglican family.’
In the past I have felt that CANA and the AMiA should end and fold into ACNA. Having observed the catastrophe of the last few months however, I now see the value in Bishop Dobbs’ admonition. We have made a mess of things in a few short years. So while I believe we can and must become an integral part of ACNA, I now think we should maintain these African connections for another decade or so. Bishop Dobbs is right: we don’t need a linear and defined structure at this moment of chaos.
Second, I was directly challenged about evangelism. To quote Bishop Julian again:
A determined dedication to evangelism is not an occasional chat about Christ with your buddy in local golf club or the brief mention of church with the local walking group. We must be committed to a revolutionary dissemination and proclamation of the Good News of Jesus Christ across North America and, in fact across the globe. The Lausanne Covenant, a declaration agreed upon by more than 2300 evangelicals said evangelism is…“the proclamation of the historical, biblical Christ, as savior and Lord with a view to persuading people to come to him personally, and so to be reconciled to God.”…It is indivisibly linked with Christian discipleship and it is one of the primary reasons why the church exists at all, and yet, and yet, the fact is the vast segments of the Church (perhaps even some of you here today) appear to be less than enthusiastic about regularly and faithfully declaring the Gospel which has been entrusted to us! [When do you last share the Gospel message with someone at the grocery store, or your non church relatives and friends?]
Someone else asked me why we want to be linked with Rwanda? In my mind it has been because we need a connection to the Communion and we need to learn about suffering from them. But, this individual asked me, what about the East African Revivial? What about a passion for evangelism and expanding the Kingdom? Combining the old time religion message of Bishop Dobbs with the questions from this brother, I was clearly convicted that my “passion” for evangelism has been weighed and found wanting. The call to die to self and proclaim Christ has been missing in my life for some time and I thank God that the Assembly revived the call to take up the cross and follow.
Thirdly, I was confronted with the need to again examine myself in regards to potential call to the ministry. Bishop Dobbs said, “Each one of us must ask: What gift have we received? Each one of us has received a gift, serve, serve like good stewards using those gifts and we must consider church planting as one of our highest priorities.”
He challenged us to ask ourselves if we are called to ministry and to church planting. I like to avoid this question and think about other things, but this short life is passing me by and will soon by over. Why not give yourself to something that will so clearly expand the Kingdom and fulfill the Great Commission? I along with all of us should reconsider the question of what God is calling us to do.
We celebrated Eucharist this morning and Bishop Thad Barnum spoke to us. He was impassioned as usual and very emotional. He discussed how even if our anger with others is justifiable, we need to confess it in order for God’s love to flow through us and avoid a root of bitterness.
Thad said that we did not come to Raleigh to start a new movement but to submit to our elders. He said that we are under authority, that is a part of being Anglican. Yes, it is the Quadrilateral, the sacraments and the episcopacy, but it is also submission to authority. He told a moving story of the bishop that he was ordained under, a liberal who tried to discourage him by assigning him a difficult chaplaincy. He wanted to lead an insurgency against this bishop, but his rector told him rather to submit to his authority. He did submit, and God used it to lead him to a place of humility. God worked through this horrible bishop to bring about a good result in Thad’s life. Thad’s emphasis was that God opposes the proud and gives grace to the humble.
He said that we (the bishops) did not come to Raleigh with a plan to give to the Rwandans, but rather to be subject to them and to listen. In this, he pointed out one of the key themes of this conference: collegiality. There was clearly grief on Terrell and Thad’s part, and there was also great honor for our Rwandan bishops who have been so mistreated and dishonored.
When Bishop Rwaje closed the Assembly and issued the statement, he asked the new transitional leaders to come onstage. He then asked Daniel Adkinson from Anglican 1000 to pray for us. This was just another example of the spirit of cooperation at the Assembly, and a fitting end to our time there. The future is yet to take shape, but key values driving the months ahead are transparency, getting feedback from all involved parties, honoring each other and rebooting a humble, Biblical and missionary Anglicanism in North America.
It was good to meet the famous Robin Jordan at the Assembly! I was also able to say hello to Kevin Kallsen, the Tom Brokaw of Anglicanism.
Wendell Kimbrough led worship and did a first rate job. Congratulations to him and all the guys.