We greatly appreciate your wonderful story about pilgrimages and the Journey to Adulthood program (“First steps on a life-long journey,” September). However, J2A has always been a collaborative program and we wanted to be sure that credit was given to some of the saints who have gone before.

J2A was developed in the mid-1980s by the parish of St. Philip’s in Durham, N.C., during the tenure of the Rev. Thomas Midyette. The members of St. Philip’s began discussing a new approach to youth ministry and discovered William Robert’s book, The Initiation to Adulthood, as a valuable guide. Amanda Smith did much of the original research and created the guiding principles of this program and then a grant from the Episcopal Church Foundation enabled the congregation to hire David Crean and Amanda Millay Hughes to write the program in a form that could be used by others.

At each stage J2A has experienced tremendous growth and it has now gone from the 300-page program LeaderResources received from David and Amanda in 1995 to a 1,200-page resource that is used by many congregations in many different denominations. LeaderResources edits and publishes the J2A program and continues to work on upgrades and new material contributed by many different people. We want to affirm the excellent work of all those who made this program possible and respond with a heartfelt “Thank you.”

My belief is that Episcopal Life should more accurately be called “Opinions on Secular Issues Written with Religious Phraseology of  Self-Righteous Liberals.” A perfect example is the commentary on the abuses at the Abu Ghraib prison, “Echoes of Evil.” The writer has lost all perspective, the reasoning is irrational, and analogies are offensive. It is astonishing that anyone would compare Abu Ghraib to the Holocaust. It is irresponsible to compare the humiliation of a few dozen victims to genocide. This is insulting to the memories of the six million who were killed simply because of their heritage.

It is shocking to compare gulags to Guantanamo. Millions of political prisoners died from starvation and disease at the gulags. The detainees at Guantanamo get three meals daily, exercise of their religion and medical treatment. If Guantanamo were truly a gulag, Ms. Gray would be among the detainees.

The writer asks us to ignore the evidence and believe her opinion, using language that minimizes atrocities. She is not in a position to judge the administration, conservative commentators or those of us that do not share her shame. This is just a pretense to criticize the Bush Administration during an election year. It should not be in Episcopal Life.

I have been indeed impressed by “Echoes of evil” by Vicki Gary [July/August]. What occurred at Abu Ghraib is indeed ghastly, but also troubling to me is the reaction of some Americans. I was sickened to see a bumper sticker "God bless America -- To hell with the rest of the world" and to hear an American man, in his 40s, call these prison abuses "college pranks." I am even disturbed by God bless America, in the sense that God should bless the entire world.

In order to dispel accusations, I want to add that I think the United States is a wonderful country, built upon sound principles. However, this does not signify that we are perfect or that to question equals is to be unpatriotic. I am troubled by the labeling of anyone who protests as being un-American or a Nazi sympathizer. Limbaugh, Hannity and O'Reilly like to put themselves on a holier-than-thou pedestal; to me, this contradicts Christ's message.

The "Crisis in health care" article in the July/August issue illustrated what I feel is the best and the worst of the Episcopal Church.  The coverage of the National Episcopal Health Ministries showed people giving of their time and presumably of their money directly to those with health-care needs. The remainder of the article showed people petitioning Caesar to spend more money, taken by the tax collectors from other people, on those with health-care needs. There are many examples of the first approach in the Bible, e.g., the good Samaritan. I just can not find any examples of the second approach in the Bible.

All the implied solutions to the crisis seem to involve more government spending.  This holistic approach to health care seems to believe in the Tooth Fairy School of Public Finance, i.e., money magically appears in government's coffers. There was no mention of medical savings plans or, heaven forbid, tax cuts. Any money rendered unto Caesar can NOT be rendered unto God.

In a confirmation class, I once learned about the three pillars of faith, tradition and reason.  Has our church lost its faith in the ability of individuals to voluntarily and charitably give to the poor? Why is our church following a tradition of looking to the government and promoting expansion of that government? Why is our church completely ignorant of the most basic economic reasoning?

Is our church pandering for Caesar, or is this just another case of "Give us Barabas"?

I am grateful for the stories on the health-care crisis and what some dioceses are doing about it in the July/August issue of  Episcopal Life.  But I am very surprised and disappointed that there is not one word about the obvious solution to this crisis, namely, a single-payer or national health-insurance system.  The United States is the only industrialized nation without such a system, and the reason is the very great political power of the vast health-care industries with their innumerable lobbyists and huge contributions to members of Congress and the executive.

A report in the January 2004 issue of the International Journal of Health Services finds that a single-payer health-insurance system would save $400 billion per year, which would easily cover the 44 million Americans without health insurance, complete coverage of all prescription drugs, retraining and placement of the thousands of people in the health-care bureaucracy who would lose their jobs and improvements in the coverage of those already insured.

For further information, see the website of Physicians for a National Health Program http://www.pnhp.org/, and for speakers on this topic call 312-782-6006.

As a college chaplain, I was initially heartened to learn that the Episcopal Church was attempting to encourage young vocations to the priesthood through the Pastoral Leadership Search Effort (PLSE) as reported in the June issue.

However, having read the information packet that was mailed to me, and after reviewing the DVD for this program, I must say I am not at all encouraged. This generic recruitment program hardly mentions Christ, is rather ambiguous about faith, never once addresses spiritual formation and has absolutely nothing specifically Christian to say about pastoral leadership and ordained ministry. These are striking omissions in a program that is supposed to be encouraging young people to consider service to Christ and his church as a deacon or priest.

Certainly we need to encourage our youth to prayerfully consider pastoral leadership vocations in the Episcopal Church. However, PLSE is not the way forward in accomplishing that goal. If it is effective, we will have a rich harvest of Unitarian social activists for our clergy … and that is all we will have. Were such as these not already the majority of clergy in ECUSA, then we might be able to tolerate such a program. As it is, for true diversity’s sake (to say nothing theological faithfulness), we need to reject PLSE and develop a pastoral search program that has Christian content.

While reading the article “Banns in Boston: Yes we should marry them” [July/August] by the Rev. Anne Fowler, I could not fail to notice the great love and concern she feels for the oppressed and downtrodden.  I could not fail to notice, also, a misunderstanding she shows of what is the Book of Common Prayer.  She referred to the language of the Book of Common Prayer as if it were a document independent from the Bible.  That is not the case.  Very noticeable also is the confusion as to the basis of what the church faith should be. 

She wrote that she is “moved by the faith and hope of my parishioners who ask that the church bless their love and commitment fully and unequivocally.”  The church’s faith, and so that of the leaders, should be based on the person of Jesus Christ, not on the parishioner’s needs and hope of what they may consider to be their personal needs.

A Christian church that provides support and helps others is doing a lot of good, but it is not following Christ’s example and teachings if the truth of the gospel is not taught.  She believes that what she is doing is correct, but her actions -- well-intentioned as they are -- lead her parishioners to the grave.

I find myself tired of the same old stances on this issue of same-sex marriage [“Banns in Boston,” July/August]. “I will do it, I won’t do it; we can’t do, we must do it.”  The underlying problem, as I see it, is that we have never really defined marriage. We always presume we know what it is -- as the prayer book implies on page 423 -- however, we are restricted by state law as to who can enter into marriage. 

Marriage wasn’t declared a sacrament until 1215 -- and then only because the church wanted to control the transfer of secular property (the Investiture Controversy). The definition of marriage has always been fluid. We can justify polygamy based on Old Testament patriarchs and kings (Abram, David and Solomon).  We can actually ban marriage if we read Paul’s injunction that says, “It is better to marry than to burn,” because preparing for the end of time does not allow time for a spouse and children.

Christian history is littered with all kinds of marriage arrangements and customs down to our own day. My grandparents’ marriage in 1902 was arranged when he was 28 and she was 24.  Marriage in the church proper only became an event for the wealthy and titled after Alexander VI had Lucretia Borgia’s second marriage in the Vatican (a political move). 

The state licenses us to witness marriages for its benefit, and as the couples are the ministers of the marriage, we clergy are present only in the name of the community to bless the relationship, not make it legal.

Re: “Banns in Boston,” I must take issue with several statements in the column by the Rev. Martha Giltinan. She states that “Same-sex partners … do not complement each other as God intends.” In marriage, the need to complement the partner consists most importantly in the love, support, encouragement, faithfulness and wisdom that each partner can impart.

When the Rev. Giltinan states that “same-sex attraction is … human brokenness” she is making a value judgement that equals condemnation.

I do agree with the Rev. Giltinan that “It is our vocation, as disciples, to challenge culture…” If so, we must speak out in favor of gay marriage, because “culture” continues to condemn it. For far too long, our fellow citizens have followed a culture of homophobia and archaic interpretations of Scripture while ruining the lives of countless good-living and deeply spiritual gays and lesbians.
Let us love, accept and celebrate the marvelous diversity of God’s creation.

Like Martha Giltinan, I, too, have "cherished gay and lesbian friends," not to mention a gay family member. However, I do not see their same-sex attraction and love as any more broken than the rest.

As a marriage and family therapist, I have seen hundreds of married, heterosexual couples who, in my opinion, do not "complement each other as God intends." Many of these relationships are damaged by disrespect, hurtfulness, addiction, betrayal and abuse. I believe that how spouses regard and treat one another is far more important in God's eyes than their gender. Furthermore, who am I to tell my gay and lesbian friends or my brother that the love they feel for a partner is somehow inferior to the love I feel for my husband?

Bless all our unions. All of us, gay or straight, need all the help we can get.

I have come to the conclusion that the Episcopal Church is a ship floundering in the rough seas of apostasy and is in imminent danger of sinking into the abyss.  This is a church led by the spirit of the times, rather than by Holy Scripture, and I cannot be a part of a church whose leaders have led it into this deplorable state of affairs.  I cannot and will not support the actions of the revisionist bishops of this church who, despite claims to the contrary, ignore the earnest pleas of the minority --  Presiding Bishop Griswold's claims to the contrary not withstanding. 

The actions of General Convention 2003 have deliberately alienated ECUSA from the overwhelming majority of the world's Anglicans, and the revisionist majority in the House of Bishops has not shown the slightest indication that they even care. By their actions, and with the urging of gay/lesbian organizations, they have ignored the pleas of those who insist that ECUSA remain a Bible-believing church whose clergy preach the gospel instead of post-modern theology and moral values.

ECUSA has only itself to blame for the existence of such organizations as the American Anglican Council (of which I am a member), Forward in Faith North America and the Anglican Communion Network.  These organizations would not exist if it were not for the fact that this was an engineered takeover of the church, something which I believe was in the works for years.  I would venture to say that most Episcopalians didn't realize this until it was too late to do anything about it.

Despite the fact that there have been 20,000 attacks against Israeli Jews in the last four years, the majority of Episcopalians seem to be rallying against the fence (wall) that has been successfully thwarting attacks by mad-dog Palestinian bombers. The Israeli Government does not have the time or resources to build a "racist" wall. This is a desperate but needed action to safeguard their people.

The so-called indigenous people have been offered literally 99 percent of what they have demanded, yet turned it down. They target innocent children, yet the Israeli Army targets terrorists.

It is frustrating to see my church defend bloodthirsty killers. Now, to top it off, Episcopal Life celebrates a traitorous rat who they call a whistleblower [“Nuclear whistleblower freed,” June]. I feel sick. Our only real friend in the Mideast having nuclear capabilities is not the same as Libya possessing them. Israel would not turn the bomb against us. Mordechai Vanunu put his own country in danger by revealing sensitive secret information to the world and should have been executed for that crime. And to top it off, [former Presiding] Bishop Edmond L. Browning, calls for the U.S.A. to disarm itself in this dangerous world of terrorists and extremist international organizations. 

Thank God, the old hippies and pacifists were not running the Episcopal Church during WWII.

I read in disbelief two items in the July/August edition of Episcopal Life.  I cannot believe the editor and staff of the national newspaper for the Episcopal Church allowed these two articles into print, to associate our church with the views of the authors in each instance.

First was “A new tool for teaching about the church” about Via Media.  No later than the second paragraph, the author relates the remarks of the Via Media developers, the Rev. Harden and her husband, Kevin Jones, about the Southern Baptist Church.  Is this how our Episcopal clergy feel about other denominations, to call out and criticize them because they do not agree with their view of Scripture, salvation and evangelism?  I do not believe that the national newspaper for the Episcopal Church should be printing criticism of other churches.  It was unnecessary in describing the Via Media course. 

The other article was “Echoes of evil” by Vicki Gray.  Simply put, the comparison of the events of Abu Ghraib prison, although bad, with the murder of millions of Jews by Nazi Germany is ludicrous. The long quotes from the book and the Vietnam story only add to the absurdity.  The entire article was poor reasoning and totally without merit.  I cannot believe that anyone would attempt to make such an absurd comparison and that Episcopal Life would print it.

How ironic that our Presiding Bishop Frank Griswold has attacked President Bush for leading the United States into war, thus alienating a large part of Europe and the rest of the world. Now the Episcopal Church, led by our presiding bishop, has acted in a way that has alienated a large part of the Anglican Communion.

To many, President Bush was courageous in enforcing United Nations resolutions, in bringing to an end a horrendous regime led by a man who seemed intent on taking over the Arab world and in giving the people of Iraq a unique opportunity to form a democratic government that could be the model for the Arab world. President Bush was courageous because he acted according to what he believed to be right in spite of possible assassination attempts against himself and his family. I fully support President Bush in his actions.

Frank Griswold and a majority of Episcopal bishops acted courageously in confirming New Hampshire’s choice of a bishop. They did so believing that the love of Christ is extended to all, including gays and lesbians, whether we believe they are sinners or not -- but we are all sinners living in a state of sin and needing continual repentance and forgiveness. (So that the wrong impression may not be inferred, my wife and I recently celebrated our 50th wedding anniversary.)

I fully support Frank Griswold and the majority of bishops for doing what they believe is right, within their understanding of Christ, as led by the Holy Spirit. Both the Episcopal Church and the United States have undertaken unpopular courses of action that have been very costly, but correct in my view, and I am thankful to both for their actions.

I read with interest, Chris Herlinger’s article “Picking and choosing” [February] about the Gospel of Thomas and Elaine Pagels, for whom I have the utmost respect. I have to disagree with Dr. Pagels on her assessment of the Gospel of Thomas. Unless I misunderstood, she claims that it is “an experimental path toward the spirit.” 

The Gospel of Thomas is nothing less than the key to the kingdom of God. The Gospel of Thomas cannot be read and understood overnight. It shows us how to become Christ-like, which is the meaning of the word Christian.. To become Christ-like, one must strive to know one’s inner self.

I take vehement issue with the commentary in the July/August issue [“Echoes of evil”}. First, there is no comparison between the extermination camps in Germany and Abu Ghraib. Millions of people were murdered in the death camps. A good friend of mine and her brother were sent to these camps because they happened to be Jewish. They were slave laborers and given just enough food to keep them alive to work.

The prisoners at Abu Ghraib were degraded, and the people who did these things are in the minority and being dealt with. People have apologized for their treatment, which is more than I can say for instance for the Bataan death march and the shooting of unarmed soldiers in cold blood at the Battle of the Bulge.

Your ActiveVoice “Echoes of evil” is so blatantly political that I sincerely hope the writer is not echoing views of the Episcopal Church or Episcopal Life. If so, there is no separation between church and state. The only thing Ms. Gray did not tell us was whom we should vote for.

My problem with people like Vicki Gray [“Echoes of evil,” July/August] is that they have little or no sense of knowing and/or understanding our recent history. The statements that insinuate that the incidents and photos of Abu Ghraib prison are somehow comparable to the extermination camps of Nazi Germany are outrageous, absurd and show a mindset blurred by a strong prejudice against the present administration.

Yes, Abu Ghraib is an embarrassment to this country and reveals flaws in our military personnel at all levels. As far as we know, there was one death at Abu Ghraib and several woundings. Is this comparable to the Nazi death camps, the Russian Gulags, Sadam Hussein’s death camps and torture chambers? The editor of Episcopal Life must pay more attention to these far-left and/or distorted editorials. I don’t think I want to read this type of biased writing any more. The question we all should ask is: What is the aim, purpose, intent, goal of this sort of rhetoric? It is at least divisive. Perhaps Vicki Gray needs to look inside of herself and attempt to find an answer to that question.

God bless Martha Giltinan for her clear, theologically sound argument against blessings for same-sex unions [“Banns in Boston,” July/August].  For too long the Episcopal Church has bent with the winds of culture and away from the Word of God.

A very important principle in keeping marriage as a union between a man and a woman is the analogy the Paul makes about the church being the bride of Christ.  The analogy is not between two of the same sex or nature (two males or two females) but of two different beings -- a bride/woman and a groom/man.  Quite frankly, the fact that the church has condoned divorce has given the world the perception that there is no faithfulness between God and the church. 

If Jesus treated his church as the church in turn allows its marriages to dissolve, there would be no hope for us.  But Jesus is faithful and, as in the Old Testament, keeps calling us back to that sacred relationship with him.

Ms. Giltinan is to be commended for standing firm on God's Word.  She will surely be blasted in Boston and in her diocese for her position.  She should know that there are faithful orthodox Christian Episcopalians across the continent who support her and her position and will be praying for her.

In response to Anne Fowler’s “Yes, we should marry them” [July/August], I need to respond to the assertion that “Nothing will change if we recognize gay marriage.” Here are some things I believe will change:

1. The Scriptures, which the Episcopal Church holds to be authoritative, will no longer be so. The Bible forbids adultery, homosexuality, incest, prostitution, bestiality and lustful thinking for the followers of God.
2. The biblical model of marriage -- that of a lifetime bond between a man and a woman, instituted by God at creation, taught by Jesus and expounded by Paul -- would lose its meaning.
3. Traditional marriage will be scarcer, as in Scandinavia today, where few young couples are bothering to get married at all.
4. Children brought up in homosexual households would suffer the lack of a Mommy and a Daddy and suffer the problems that beset such homes: higher rates of incest, violence, promiscuity, instability and divorce.
5. The church, which should speak to the conscience of the nation, will be further weakened by disagreements and splits.
6. Acceptance of gay marriage will become a litmus test for ordination to the priesthood. This has already happened in Ontario.

Some pretty serious consequences. Where is the conscience of the church in all this?

Re: “Banns in Boston,” I, too, am a northeast liberal. Some of my best friends are Samaritans, many of whom are good people. Recently I heard about one who even helped one of our own people who had been mugged and our own people just walked by.

Allowing in Samaritans and gentiles would be as ludicrous as allowing women into the inner sanctum to offer sacrifices. It is universally acknowledged that God is masculine, and only men fully created in his likeness can truly model and serve him. Woman have their God-given place and should be content with their own natural and traditional truth and reality.

I feel their pain, but to teach or to do otherwise would start us down the slippery slope of pagan goddess worship or, worse, a hand-in-glove, plug-in-socket theology that justifies immortal gods chasing after and impregnating mortal women. What’s next: sexual equality?

I so agree with the Rev. Martha Giltinan that it is difficult to aide by these immutable principles universally taught by tradition and faith in every age but, as she suggests, unchanging obedience to ancient good only serves us in our struggle to be holy.

I understand the Rev. Martha Giltinan’s perspective on the sacraments as gifts, but I disagree with her view of gay marriage.  It is hard for me to see all of the Bible as literal. Many times in history, people have used the Bible to exclude or include others based on one verse or another.  It seems important for religious people to have others to point to as disobedient.  It is harder to see the log in our own eyes than to see the speck in the other's eye.

I often pray that God will help me see around the log, unless he chooses to remove it.It is not possible to know the mind of God, and we are too reliant on ourselves if we think we can.  I was baptized as an infant and confirmed as a young adult.  I participate in the Eucharist.  According to the Rev. Giltinan’s thinking, I am so broken I should be excluded from the gifts of God. I think it is up to God to decide at the end of my life if I have been worthy of his gifts or not.

I was married for 20 years, and my marriage ended for many of the same reasons marriages end for other people.  I have been with my same-sex partner in a committed and loving relationship for 21 years.  We will continue together whether we are married or not.  We will never be equal in the eyes of the church until we have the right to marry.  We will however continue our spiritual journey to the time of our death.

I do realize that we have many in our church who wish for changes in our approach to human sexuality in their lifetimes, yet it is quite evident that our church in the U.S.A. has proceeded too fast on this issue in regard to the majority of the Anglican Communion, not to mention other Christian communions.

I am an Anglican in faith and practice and at this time have no desire to leave the Anglican Communion. We must remember that the Episcopal Church is not a church unto itself, but one of many churches that make up the Anglican Communion. One might give friendly advice to our church to proceed with caution at our next General Convention, because our hurts and pains will be there. It is my opinion that we cannot afford to fracture our church even more at this time.