hewn brand of salvation” is now availablernto save the Church, or failing that, to providernan Anglican gathering point in thernUnited States. This new witness, he tellsrnus, is provided by hvo “stoudy orthodox”rnEpiscopal priests recently consecrated tornserve as missionary bishops to America.rnHe does not raise the c[uestion of howrnthese men might be more effective thanrnthe orthodox bishops of yesteryear, whornwere shouted down. He closes with, “It’srnwhat’s actually on the platter thatrncounts —right?”rnBoth the silver-filigreed platter andrnwhat was offered on it bear close consideration.rnThe reason is not to understandrnthe wonderful metaphor, but to get pastrnthe amusing comfortableness of it, and tornconsider the terrible possibilit}’ that thernplatter and “immaculate taste and goodrnmanners” grew dearer than the salvationrnon it. The salvation offered was therncatholic compliment of graces bestowedrnon, and affirmed by, the undividedrnChurch. This faith and practice—withoutrnreformers’ deletions or Roman accretionsrn— is the Anglican hallmark. Regainingrnthis balance in the storm ofrnReformation and Counterreformation,rnand maintaining it in the heaving wavesrnthat followed, is the great achievement ofrnthe Church of England. But Satan neverrnrests: In time, he raised waves to washrnover the orthodoxy.rnThe problem facing diese new “missionar)’rnbishops” is, by now, an old one. Itrnbegan in the first half of the 20th centuryrnfrom a combination of forces and blossomedrnby the late 60’s, eventually removingrnthe Anglican and Catholic naturernfrom the Episcopal Church. In response,rnthe continuing Church movement arosernamong Episcopalians, most visibly inrn1977 at the Congress of St. Louis, out ofrnwhich marched Hie Anglican CatholicrnChurch, determined to maintain an Anglicanrnpresence in America. Today’s majorrnderivatives are the Anglican Provincernof Christ the King and the AnglicanrnChurch in America. As a result, there arcrnhundreds of traditional Anglican churchesrnacross the country established by formerrnEpiscopalian clergv’ and lait’. Andrnwithin the Episcopal Church itself, therernis Mr. Murchison’s Episcopal Synod ofrnAmerica, tr’ing to call the Church backrnto orthodox)’.rnI’hese jurisdictions offer salvation inrnthe essentials of Anglicanism —”lots ofrnold-style religion,” most often roughhewn,rnand only occasionally on a silverrnplatter—but their cr)’ in the wilderness isrnunanswered. The deafening silence isrnpuzzling. In small part, this may be becausernthe call is consistently ignored byrncommentators such as Mr. Murchison,rnbut surely there is another reason.rnLooking beyond the article and at Anglicanismrnin its present state, I submit arndifferent conclusion: that, in fact, it is thernplatter that matters. Objectively, the evidencernforces the conclusion, becausernwhat was on the platter has been availablernin the continuing churches for 25rnyears.. . and rejected. That it is rejectedrnby Mr. Murchison is disheartening.rnThat, in this latest form, it will be rejectedrnyet again is certain. Satan never rests.rn—]ames Muse DavisrnStarkviUe, MSrnOn Speaking in OparrnAlthough I enjoved Brian Kirkpatrick’srn”Letter From Barsoom” {Correspondence,rnMay) and have no desire to diminishrnits claims for the uniqueness of Argentinernculture, I must point out anrnerror. Dr. Kirkpatrick claims that onlyrnthe Argentines use vos, but the Costa Ricansrnalso use it and, as my patriotic Ticornneighbor regretfully admitted, so do thernNiearaguans.rn-Billkley’rnSanto Tomds de Santo Domingornde HerediarnCosta RicarnCULTURAL REVOLUTIONSrnT H E REFORM PARTY’S nationalrnconvention convened in Long Beach,rnCalifornia, in early August. I arrived,rnfilled with a mixture of anticipation andrntrepidation: I fully expected Patrick J.rnBuchanan to overcome the last obstaclernto launching what promises to be an historicrncampaign; on the other hand, Irnknew the anti-Buchananistas weren’t goingrnto make it easy. Indeed, in the weeksrnbefore the convention, ominous reportsrnpoured off tiie newswires: “Reform Parti,’rnConvention Will Be a Brawl”; “ConventionrnSecurit}’ Increased”; “Reform Parti,’rnRiunble.” Should I pack my brass knuckles?rnM’ own role at this convention wasrnsomewhat strange. I had press credentials,rnand, armed with a laptop andrnadorned widi the yellow badge that grantedrnme instant access to everything, Irncould have passed for a member of thernFourth Estate (complete with beepingrncell phone) if not for die wild glint in myrneye that pegged me as a Buchananite —rnand a delegate to boot! Tapping madlyrnaway in the press room, seated in front ofrnthe New York Times and next to CNN, Irnsent in my hvice-daily reports via modemrnand then hurried to the nearest phonernbooth, quickly changed badges, andrnspent the rest of my time trolling the conventionrnfloor.rnAlthough I had been told in advancernthat I might be asked to speak, I was givenrnthe final word only when I arrived. Thernmost gratif’ing aspect of fliis was tiie opportunityrnto criticize CNN. For threerndays, 1 had been listening to the CNNrncrew disparage the delegates as “weirdos”rnand watching them cobble together thernsound bites that scr’ed as ammunition inrntheir propaganda war against Buchanan.rnNaturally, I said nothing—I was savingrnmy criticisms for my speech, when Irncould address CNN’s Cary Tnchmanrnfrom the podium.rnI had a special enmity for dear littiernGary, who looked like a maliciousrnschoolboy while producing reports featuringrnJohn Hagelin, a dippy disciple ofrnthe Maharishi Mahesh Yogi who teachesrn”physics” at “Maharishi Universit)'” andrnhas been the standard-bearer of the “Anybodyrnbut Buchanan” forces. Hagelin’srnovoid face and bald pate, skin shiningrnwith .sweat under the klieg lights, madernhim look like a hard-boiled egg. Tuchmanrnasked him no tough questions —rndoes he really believe in “vogie flying,” orrnthat the answer to tiie Koso’o problem isrntranscendental meditafion?—but let himrnpresent a televised version of his legalrnbrief to the Federal Election Commission,rnarguing that Buchanan had committedrnelection fraud.rnI was thinking of Tnchman when, thernnext day, I told the delegates during myrnprime-time speech: “Oh, I know whatrnthev’ll tell von on CNN, and in the NewrnYork Post; we’ve all heard the same tiredrnmantra: The Reform Part}- is supposed tornOCTOBER 2000/5rnrnrn