is -john-david really gay? i've heard that he is from a reliable source but i've never seen any confirmation of that. does anyone out there in blogger land know for sure?
Well, Jake, we are praying for the Diocese of San Joaquin, and we are praying for the Church. But what can anyone do when the Bishop sets everything up as "You're either for me or against me!"
That's the essential dynamic in every church split; that's how schism gets clergy-driven. So what are the voters to do? Do we really think those delegates are going to turn back now?
With God all things are possible, but this manipulated dynamic has prevailed for years now. So I'm not optimistic.
There's a motion to amend the constitutional change, by changing two words. The reason given is that it would give them another year to study the Southern Cone, as an amended contstitutional change would have to be passedat two conventions.
The bishop left the chair to address to amendment. He will oppose such a stalling tactic with all his strength.
Amendment defeated. No surprise.
From the diocesan convention video linked by Jake: they are "victims," they are "abused," the Southern Cone offers them "protection."
Protection?
From what?
"Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities"
-- Voltaire
Speaking of TEC as "Jezebel". One wonders if anyone has exposed the lies and half truths being said in that diocese about TEC?
Last night, the bishop told reporters, in reference to his time with bishops from the Southern Cone, how refreshing it was to bewith bishops who actually believed something. No one objected. They moved on to the next question.
In San Joaguin, the entire House of Bishops are depicted as apostate and heretical. And apparently, no one is refuting these false charges.
It appears they are going to make this move to the Southern Cone based on arguments rooted in half truths. Quite sad.
They are voting on the Anglican identity change.
They had to get the clergy to line up on each side of the room to vote, because of an inaccurate first vote. The image of these clergy lined up facing each other across the room was troubling. Looked like battle lines.
Lay vote now being done. They will line up according to their vote and pass by a counter to have their vote recorded.
Jake we've been lucky in Pittsburgh to have some very good people fighting for TEC. Also, as sad as Duncan is, he has been better than JDS in regards to those of us who want to remain Episcopalians. We in fact were allowed, with little resistance, to call a liberal to moderate rector as has another parish in the diocese. Duncan and Pittsburgh even have licensed several openly gay priest to work in this diocese.
That said, one has to wonder where we'd be if Calvary and ST. Stephen's didn't take the lead. Guess SJ has no such churches.
A moment of silence after the vote was taken.
Bishop speaks about being a minority. Wants no war hoop when vote is announced.
He claims every clergy, regardless of their vote, will become a member of the Southern Cone. The diocese will move as a whole.
Vote on changes to Article II (removing TEC and replacing it with "Anglican Communion"):
Clergy:
70 yes
12 no
Lay:
103 yes
10 no
Only 111 lay registered. The validity of the vote is being questioned.
Once they sort this out, it seems clear the second reading of this amendment will be approved.
This cocks the gun. The resolution to join the Southern Cone will pull the trigger.
Motion is carried.
The names of the 12 clergy who voted against have been asked to be recorded. After discussion, the bishop will send those names to the person who made the request. A curious request.
That is one incredibly lopsided vote, Jake. Roughly 85% of the clergy and 90% of the laity voted yes. I don't think you would get that kind of margin in Pittsburgh. The bishop has been working on this diocese for a long time.
the 12 clergy who voted against
The Twelve! Lovely irony.
The wounds of Christ are becoming deeper and more swollen as we speak.
I have gotten to the point where I really believe it is time for a new reformation needed in TEC. It is time to once again reminded 'the staff' that there are no fiefdoms in TEC. General Convention 2009 needs a House of Deputies that is willing to freeze everything until this nonsense ends. Stop the funding or lower it or keep it as it is with reduced items for 'Anglican Communion' business until we clean house and pay for the legal expense our leadership have incurred for us by inaction.
Where is the Executive Council now? They issue a letter saying such moves our not legal yet, where is the Chancellor of TEC today? Shouldn't he be there declaring the action invalid in person with Bonnie Anderson by his side? What is our Presiding Bishop doing this weekend. Shouldn't she be in San Joaquin defending the flock? Spineless wonders leading us on the good Ship of Fools called TEC.
Julius Caesar by William Shakespeare:
"You blocks, you stones, you worse then senseless things!"
I hope Remain Episcopal has a statement ready. In a few minutes, there will no longer be an Episcopal bishop or any Episcopal clergy in the diocese of San Joaquin.
This may be wishful thinking, but I am hoping that there has been a great deal of advance planning going on behind the scenes both at 815 and in the local Via Media organizations. If I had a plan to respond to this, I certainly wouldn't post it on the web in advance.
Incorrect information Jake. TEC will be there but, the leadership of TEC will act as if some strange unforeseen event that just occurred in California.
"How ever did it happen Yankees in Georgia!" cried Aunt Pittipat in Gone with the Wind.
The General Convention has not dissolved the Diocese of San Joaquin. Only the General Convention of TEC has that authority.
Schofield said the "diocese as a whole" is leaving TEC and joining the Southern Cone. Assuming this is legal, how will faithful clergy/laity remain in TEC, and what will their diocese be called?
I hope The Twelve will lead them. And I thank the Lord for making it The Twelve. He does indeed work in mysterious ways.
Remain Episcopal has a press release here. (pdf) It is loading very slowly; their web site may be busy at the moment.
Terry,
Of course the diocese will still remain.
However, Bp. Schofield just announced that if they pass theSouthern Cone resolution, all diocesan clergy will become members of the Southern Cone.
No doubt some of the clergy will reject this in the days to come. But for now, there will be no Episcopal clergy in San Joaquin. That was my point.
On a side note, but because the gang here is the only place I can think of who would appreciate this, have y'all seen this?
http://anglicancommunioninstitut...ent/view/121/2/
Benjamin Twinamaani:How American Anglicans Think and Act: A Primer for the Global South
I thought it was going to be all USA-bashing, but it was *fascinating* to read (IMHO). I am not sure I agree with his conclusions; but it does clarify why so many non-westerners are boggled by the actions of the western church.
Yes, I saw that Paul. It is good,but is dated November 8.
The situation is so fluid, what with this new resolution to officially move to the Southern Cone, and the rather shocking announcemnt, to me, that all clergy, regardless of their personal opinions, will also be transferred to the Southern Cone, has changed the situation, requiring a new response.
Remain Episcopal is the only entity in existence (along with the three parishes that identify themselves with RE) that is in a postion to claim to be the Episcopal presence in San Joaquin.
Voids are not a good thing. Someone needs to stand up NOW and fill that void.
BTW, Remain Episcopal's website can be found here.
The rest of the amendments to the constitution were passed, with the same number of members voting no.
A question asked;
If the bishop is inhibited, will the diocese be run by the standing committee.
The answer was, if they are part of the Southern Cone, they will not recognized TEC's actions. The inhibition will be ignored.
Can TEC's pension fund withstand all these (and more) departures?
Ed
Paul M. I hope there's been some advance planning behind the scenes too, but I'm not counting on it. Remember Bonnie Anderson telling faithful Episcopalians that they were on their own? I haven't seen much planning of any kind at any stage. Plenty of handwringing and a good bit of caving in, but little in the way of defense or assistance. Oh well, the Puritans are at it again -- you're on your own, deal with them as best as you can.
This is a strange kind of fatalism that liberals in safe enclaves are prone to indulge themselves in, right up to the level of the Archbishop of Canterbury. No message to the Primates yet, no response to Canada's plea, but we get this from ++Rowan at the Building Bridges Conference in Singapore:
"It is crucial to faith in a really existing and absolute transcendent agency that it should be understood to be what it is independently of any lesser power: the most disturbing form of secularisation is when this is forgotten or misunderstood." And much much more. It's on the ABC's website.
+Rowan writes to reject -- utterly -- violence in the name of defending religion. He ought to be right and I ought to be applauding him. And yet, he seems to think that any action he might take to defend member Churches of his Communion against CANA-style incursions would be an act of violence.
But would it, really? Again, this seems a strange confusion that Western liberals are particularly prone to (IMHO). They seem to think of themselves as so very, very powerful that they must never respond to any provocation in any way at all. As if they would annihilate all Nigeria by frowning on ++Abuja. (What a narcissistic fantasy that one is!) But if ++Rowan were to stand up to Nigerian or Ugandan border incursions or threats, would it really be such a dreadful example of overwhelming force? Such terribly bad, bad, bad, colonialist imperialist bullying? Would it be, really?
And he's Archbishop of Canterbury, after all. There are some duties that come with the office. He shouldn't try to dodge them. It's one thing to say nolo episcopari before you are seated on the Chair of St. Augustine, and quite another to keep saying it afterward.
Now more than ever is a companion relationship with neighboring dioceses needed. A proposal for Eucharistic sharing, via lay ministers, has already been made to the bishop of an adjoining diocese. We will continue to go forth and serve the Lord.
The Holy Ghost at work! May His glory continue to spread.
Amen
I loved the Voltaire quote - priceless - mahalo nui.
As far as taking the entire Diocese (including clergy who intend to remain loyal to their ordination vows in TEC) to the Province of the Southern Cone, this would apparently fit in with +J-DS's rather grand view of episcopacy and this looney idea that has been floated (encourged by we know who)that dioceses take precedence over National Church Constitiutions. Let's see how we know who can muddy up the waters yet again.
Let's keep the people in our paryers.
815 cannot act until it knows where Rowan Williams stands. Which side is he on? Imagine 815 going to court with the seceding diocese of San Joaquin arguing along the lines of TEC's Constitution and Canons, and Rowan Williams testifying on behalf of his 'pals' Venables and JD Schofield, stating under oath that he backed SanJ seeking refuge from persecution by TEC's PB and primatial oversight from the Province of the Southern Cone?
The CA courts would then rule that there is a 'division' in the denomination, and that SanJ is as Anglican as TEC, at least in the eyes of Cantuar, and that, based on neutral principles, SanJ retains its properties and churches.
Ed,
I doubt if it will even be a blip on the screen of the pension fund. We're talking about 50 congregations, effecting 70 clergy, of which 12 seem to be against the move.
Now voting on an amendment to change the canons so the wording will allow them to accept congregations into the diocese who are outside the diocesan boundaries...iow, become a non-geographical diocese, much like CANA.
The changes were adopted.
815 CAN act, and it bloody well better.
Quoth Jake: "In San Joaguin, the entire House of Bishops are depicted as apostate and heretical. And apparently, no one is refuting these false charges. It appears they are going to make this move to the Southern Cone based on arguments rooted in half truths. Quite sad."
It's the same in any Network diocese. Plenty of half-truths and spin out there, plenty of people making decisions based on it. It's been like this for a while. And 815's response to it has been? Next to nothing. "You're on your own."
Some time back I said in this forum that people in dioceses like mine needed a way to get accurate information to the people in the pews. We needed newsletters, flyers, FAQ sheets. "Oh, go put that together on your own" was the response. "Don't bother us, we've got better things to do."
What a shame no one at the top has been able to see a need for actively countering separatist propaganda!!
I am afraid that Charlotte is right on the mark when she wrote: "What a shame no one at the top has been able to see a need for actively countering separatist propaganda."
I am so sick and tired of Ducan, Iker and Schofield getting away with their pack of lies, spin and half-truths about TEC, and what Prayer Book Episcopalians believe.
what a shock....it passed...
They just joined southern cone by resolution simple majority
An addition to the canons, "Canon 38",
now being presented. This is to accept the offer to become part of the Southern Cone.
It passes.
They pulled the trigger.
As of 2:42 pm EST on December 8, 2007, the bishop and clergy of the diocese of San Joaquin are no longer members of the Episcopal Church.
do we have to go through the whole process of deposing the bishop or can the PB declare that there is no ecclesiastical authority and thus start the process of electing a new bishop of san joaquin?
If I were in that diocese, I would immediately form a standing committee, consisting of the the members of the Remain Episcopal Executive Committee:
Cindy J. Smith, W. Marshall Johnston, Richard Jennings, Jan Dunlap, The Rev. Keith F. Axberg, Ejae Brown, Amanda Gaona, Lee Jensen, Bob Kittredge, Beryl Simkins, Nedra Voorhees, Andee Zetterbaum and Nancy Key.
I would announce this new standing committee today.
OK, who wants to start a pool? How many days (weeks, months, decades) will it take before ++Rowan deigns to take public notice of these events?
But seriously, folks. Now, ++Rowan has two choices.
1) Do nothing. Act as if +John-David's standing as a bishop has not changed at all. Continue his Lambeth invitation and pretend nothing has happened. It breaks his own precedent (Recife) and the settled practice of the Church since Nicaea, but hey ho, anything for a quiet life.
2) Refuse to recognize San Joaquin as a diocese of the Southern Cone. Withdraw +John-David's invitation to Lambeth. The Global South plus ++Venables will then refuse to come to Lambeth, and attempt to start their own, rival Communion. Oooh, scarey!
Any bets as to which course ++Rowan will take?
And whatever he does -- It took just a few minutes to create this mess, but we are all going to be spending the next half-dozen decades cleaning up after it.
Not sure if Halo Scan will recognize me from a different computer...
I'm taking notes to report to my computer-less mother later on today. I was doing OK, until I copied down Jake's "As of 2:42 PM EST...no longer members of the Episcopal Church" and then tears came.
Keeping the Remain Episcopal folks (and anyone who wants to be affiliated with them and hasn't yet been able to, or brought themselves to do so) in prayer and thought and more prayer.
Also praying for those who respond to the call to minister to those in need in San Joaquin - may they act in the Spirit, and with all the compassion and love that they can bring.
Mary Beth
This is a sad event; it should not have had to come to this.
Bp Schofield did say that all clergy would be resident in the Southern Cone, but that he would immediately honor any requests to transfer back into ECUSA.
I remember plenty of conventions in "moderate" dioceses where there was a lot of maneuvering and ramming things through by the high-handed use of Robert's Rules, so that those who favored changing the teachings of the faith could have the room to do so. I am thankful that I am now in a diocese that, while left-leaning, has a parliamentarian who helps those who are not as sharp on Robert's as some to still have a chance to speak and to frame motions and amendments.
As for what happens to the organization, properties, etc -- I would imagine that it depends to a great degree on the diocese's articles of incorporation and the laws of the state of CA on religious corporations. These will not be the sole determinants, but neither will the various canons.
Lord have mercy.
Christ have mercy.
Lord have mercy.
IMHO, the leadership in TEC does not need to wait for a signal from Archbishop Williams to move forward to assist the faithful in San Joaquin. The ABC will do what he will do, but the leadership of TEC must move quickly - NOW - to care for the remnant of the flock in SJ.
Amen, Grandmère Mimi, amen.
I am typing this from the Diocese of San Joaquin convention floor where we have broken for lunch.
Remain Episcopal has distributed a flyer to the effect that there will be a meeting of all loyal Episcopalians in the continuing Diocese of San Joaquin at Holy Family Episcopal Church 30 minutes after the end of the convention today.
I am very proud of our 12 clergy who stood (very much) alone in opposition to this vote.
We still have a vote for incorporation of Holy Family Episcopal Church coming up this afternoon. We need this vote to pass.
Thanks to all here for keeping us in your prayers, and we remain optimistic that things will work out for the best: Romans 8:28.
Grandmere Mimi, I agree. 815 doesn't have to wait for a signal from Rowan Williams to move forward to assist the faithful in SanJ. 815 should move now, i.e., within 24 hours. However, after PB Jefferts Schori's depostion by the VA courts last month, it behooves 815 to wait until Rowan has come out of hibernation before taking legal action against Mr. Schofield et al. Or else 815 might be wasting $ millions on lawyers' fees and, in the end, not get the desired outcome. After all, Duncan, Iker, Ackerman and Schofield are Rowan's 'pals'. He has never denied meeting with them in 2003, encouraging them to form a Network of 'confessing' Anglicans opposed to the GC Church.
NPR just reported about an hour ago that the Diocese of San Joaquin "seceded" from the Episcopal Church.
It was their lead story. My! us fags can sure kick up a shit storm! All we have to do is say "no" when they ask us to go stand over behind the potted palm tree, and folks go ballistic!
The Twelve in San Joaquin certainly have their work cut out for them. The task must be so daunting, and yet perhaps exhilirating. They are finally out from under the thumb of the Prince Bishop, and they can start the work of building anew. I will certainly remember them in my prayers.
I loved the Voltaire quote. There are days when the Church makes me want to exclaim with him, "Destroy the Infamy!"
Add my Amen to Grandmere Mimi's sentiments above.
The Archbishop will continue to ride that fence and speak out of both sides of his mouth. We shouldn't wait for him (we might as well wait for Godot).
Our first responsibility is to the Faithful Remnant in San Joaquin.
The BBC has just posted the story:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/ameri...cas/
7134835.stm
John Henry...The case is in the hands of the appellate court. In my experience with CA law, which was simply small claims I admit but I won, an appellate court hears a case based on the Record as received. They have that record and it is prior to the attempted secession. I do not know if they would hear the case de novo or not, can someone with appellate CA experience jump in here.
We had similar, though smaller, maneuver happen in our parish earlier this year.
The Vestry gave a Power Point presentation and then forced an "opinion vote". Two days later they took the property declared we were no longer Episcopalian and officially joined CANA.
Luckily we had a determined group of faithful Episcopalians and with the help of and strong leadership from the Bishop of Atlanta, who sent us an outstanding interim Rector. We recovered our church and are now a vibrant, growing Christian church again.
While we miss those that walked we do not miss the hard-nosed tactics they used to divide our church
Jim Naughton put Mr. Schofield's deception of his diocesan convention in beautiful language that fits today's U.S. American context:
"Bishop John David Schofield of the Diocese of San Joaquin has apparenlty been consulting the same lawyers as the Bush-Cheney administration and has received the same advice: the constitution allows you to claim whatever powers you desire. How else to explain the curious argument he presented to delegates at his convention today in urging them to vote to secede from the Episcopal Church?"
The request that those clergy who dissented be noted makes sense, first from the point of view of their status as TEC loyal and therefore not subject to inhibition and second from the point of view of their pensions.
How the CPG handles the question of pensions will be an interesting one. If the CPG sees each case as an individual's choice to abandon TEC, it would seem, that they have elected to do so on the day they voted to do so but maybe, by the CPG's own rules, additional paper may be needed. But, those who wished to have their votes recorded as no, and tried to have them so recorded, clearly have not abandoned TEC, regardless of +Schofield's claim that all San Joaquin clergy are now transferred to Southern Cone.
EPfizH,
Yes, that makes sense, and explains why the request for the list of the 12 was made.
Bp. Schofield has placed those clergy in a very strange place. Since he is still their bishop (one would assume...although since he has abandoned TEC, is he?), they must follow his protocol, which appears to be that they must now apply to leave a province they never had any intention of joining.
Agha, prayers for Holy Family.
I am so proud of the members of Remain Episcopal and the twelve priests (and, oh yes! that symbolic number). Lord, continue to give them strength and courage, and your peace that passes understanding to keep their minds and hearts.
Does Schofield really have the authority to transfer ALL clergy to the southern cone--without their (clergy) permission?
Holy Family, Fresno's request to be incorporated is now being considered.
The Rev. Keith F. Axberg (one of the faithful 12), is the priest for this congregation. He spoke in favor of the resolution.
The priest from St. Paul's, Visalia spoke against it, claiming things were too unclear right now.
It was clarified that passing this resolution would not be the last step for incorporation. There would still be a process.
Question asked how they can incorporate a parish into the Episcopal Church, since they are no longer in the Episcopal Church.
It seems to me to approve the request for incorporation would bind this congregation to this new entity, the Southern Cone Diocese of San Joaquin, for some time into the future. I'm not sure this is such a good move.
Resolution passed.
williex2 -- I cannont state if Dave is gay or not, but i can state in a court of law and not purgery myself that he made a blatant pass at me, and I know one other male with whom he attempted to have sex.
So, how will the "GS" now deal with their own gay bishop. By ignoing it of course.
williex2, if this is indeed the case, we need that truth to be known. So much spiritual abuse has taken place that if, as I have long suspected, self-loathing hypocrisy is driving it, then for God's sake and the Church's, let's lance that boil and let healing happen.
Sorry, I meant to address that remark to James I.
I love how the certificates for the 'new' Southern Cone clergy were made before convention ended.
Sic transit gloria mundi!
Let us stop preaching about how we have to live to our Baptismal Covenant when ordination vows mean nothing.
Now we have entered into the real outer zone of 'Anglicanism'. I can't believe that there is a single person here that really cares what the His Grace, Rowan the Fool of Canterbury has to say about TEC. He has no standing in TEC. Rowan's opinion is about as important to us as the opinion of the Bishop of Rome on how we govern ourselves.
If ever there was a time to kill any movement, in TEC or those churches that make up the Anglican tradition of faith, to created a curia or magisterium it is now.
Start the movement now in your parish and diocese to clean house and make it clear that the golden rule in these cases is - He who has the gold rules. It is the laity that has the 'gold' and the others are our paid servants.
General Convention 2009 is the time for the laity to act. We can effectively kill any item brought to the floor of that convention. Time to think out ways to show what happens when the majority of TEC (clergy and laity) is angry with the direction and quality of leadership from the bishops and 815. We fund them to perform a service for us. If we have to pay to pray then let us make sure that those we pay perform as defined by the vows they have taken before us as a congregation. Vows have to mean something.
Seventy members of the clergy just broke their ordination vows. One bishop just broke is consecration vows. 103 members of the laity just voted to rob TEC of its' property. Discipline is required on many levels.
Time to set boundaries and performance standards.
As I said, I will state my experience with David Schofield, former bishop not heretic, in court. I know of one other young man (well not young now) who had an almost similar experience to mine. When he told me his experience, it was as if he knew part of what happened to me. David propositioned me on two separate occasions, once in Inverness and once in Paso Robles.
"Back then" i was flattered, actually, and it didn't bother me because he wasn't the homophobe he turned into. Had he been the mental person he is today, i would have screamed bloody murder.
it would be interesting to track down all those young men (emphasis on young) where went on retreats in Inverness from about 1972-1980 and see how many of them had similar bed-time experiences. Anyone reading this have an experience they'd like to share?
Dave, if you are reading this, and I'm sure you aren't, but your lap dogs are, be very scared because you may have shot your own balls off today in San Joaqun.
My parents are members of a parish in the Diocese of San Joaquin, and their parish have supported our ministry here in Panamá. But when I visited last year, the liturgy had changed; the service began with a man at the piano playing stuff and talking, kind of a "Christian Piano Bar" (I swear, I would not have been surprised if he'd had a Brandy Snifter full of dollar bills on the piano) followed by praise hymns with people waving their hands in the air. And the rector is a "Son of the House!" I told my parents that they had been infiltrated by Liturgical Baptists and snake handlers and nothing good would come of it. And now they think they are part of la Iglesia del Cono de Sur Norte. Maybe my next mission field is in San Joaquin.
williex2, we are not supposed to talk about that, obvious as it may be, but I will say that the first time I ever saw Schofield on one of those Anglican TV videos, I expected him to throw on a feather boa and break out in a rousing rendition of "Diamonds Are a Girl's Best Friend."
So, how will the "GS" now deal with their own gay bishop. By ignoing it of course.
As someone at (I think) Maddie's place said, fudge is OK as long as it's not pink fudge.
LOL @ NLNH's comments.
A zillion years ago, Dave cut one hell of a GQ figure in his vestments andhe LOVED to swish around the sacristy in them. On him, in the vestments, a feather boa wouldn't have looked odd. :)
I really do have to feel so sorry for David; to think of his brilliance ruined by mental instability is just tragic. and to know that the mental illness has ruined the lives of so many people is just sick.
James, a lifetime of self-loathing does terrible things to people--just think of Roy Cohn and J. Edgar Hoover. They were even sicker than Schofield, or at least able to hurt more people.
Padre Mickey, I wish you would post that account at Thinking Anglicans. I posted the visit of the "prophet" there, and it would be nice for people to see further evidence that the Schofieldians are anything but "orthodox."
He has graciously offered to transfer back to TEC from the Province of the Southern Cone any clergy who wish to be in TEC. If that's not cheek it is totally delusional. If I were in that strange situation as a priest canonically resident in DSJ, I would consider myself still a priest in good standing in that Episcopal Diocese and await the appointment of a new Standing Committee and an Assisting Bishop who remains loyal to his/her ordination vows. In the interim, I'd change the locks on my church and the combination to the safe
and talk to lawyers about keep schismatics out of the property.
Yahoo and CNN News:
http://edition.cnn.com/2007/US/1...n.ap/
index.html
I just wrote a note to Presiding Bishop Katharyn Jefferts-Schori
suggesting she get a'moving and do some "Grand" Standing...I think, we've had enough out-of-control spiritual/emotional illness running riot at our Church (at least I have and that would be a lifetimes worth)...it really is time for biggoted people to take responsiblity for their abusive actions and for our leadership to be MORE responsible by taking very aggressive actions against the on-going promoting of fear and hate and the thieving of Church Property and the "outcasting and demoralizing" of heterosexual women and LGBT Christians at CHURCH!
No more "posturing," no more "practical thinking" no more tolerating the intollerant behavior, speak and ACITIONS of demented hate/fear-mongers.
It's time for the ++Shepard to remove the "beloved" sheep from a 10 lane Freeway at rush hour!
that would be ++Katharyn Jefferts-Schori:
kjeferts@aol.com
my linko went southo!
whoops:
kjefferts@aol.com
Watching and praying.
There was a meeting of the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin at Holy Family Episcopal Church tonight.
We are still here. We welcome all faithful Episcopalians.
The Episcopal Church in San Joaquin welcomes you. All of you, in the love of Christ.
Alleluia, amen!
Thanks so much to the faithful 12 priests who voted against the bishop today. I was proud of each and every one of them.
We all know well the misery Mr. Schofield has crafted. I am annoyed seeing his name plastered all over the Remain Episcopal site. Let’s be done with him and remove all reference to him so we can visit the site and receive POSITIVE feelings to rejoice in a NEW glorious time.
God bless you, aghaveagh, Dusty, Leslie, Beryl, and all who felt abandoned yesterday. You're not abandoned; we will support you in any way we can as you take what will surely be a profound and memorable part of your journey with Christ. Our thoughts and prayers are with you and your Twelve good, brave clergy.
Dear fs,
Thanks so much for your love and prayers. It has been a rough go.
Blessings!
James 1,
What could be flattering about it? It all sounds heartbreaking to me. And, why have you posted this publically rather than going to your brother privately? I don't think what you are doing is right, and I"m grieved by the whole spirit of your post, and by some of the comments here.
This whole situation is tragic. I think there's a real shortage of the love of Christ the whole way around, IMO.
Grace.
Humm...let me see if I've got this "straight"...LGBT Christians and some heterosexual women are "put off and out" by a (now former) Episcopal Bishop who was/is, em, had/having troubles with dealing with his sexual acting out?
So, the self-loathing shepard initiated a hate/fear-mongering CLENSING campaign against LGBT people and heterosexual women at ALL levels of Churchlife at his Diocese?
Let me see, would that be because of gross (pardon) former/current troubles with his own "sexual" acting out behavior or merely is it because of shame that has caused aggressive fear, hate and demoralizing/demeaning unkindnesses to be delivered against others like him (but, not like HIM)?
Oh what to do, what to do? What kind of deadly pridefilled silliness, doubletalk and simpering/pampering is this?
Amnesia and a fix-em-upper hate campaign won't eliminate truth or heal tormented emotions...grandstanding for God while harming others doesn't sound like a spiritually wholesome or even a basic Christian ideal to me.
I think someone is attempting to throw the Baby Jesus "out" with the bathwater in this pasted-together non-fix-em-upper self-hate-deal for redemption "deal."
Agreed, Leonardo Ricardo. A twisted, self-hating person of authority and power can damage many, many vulnerable, souls "under his care" ...
... and then there are those who are all too happy to blame the victim for speaking up, but who would never dare impugn the reputation of the titled and powerful.
We're not gonna take it.
We're not gonna take it.
We're not gonna take it.
Never did and never will.
Don't want no religion
And as far as we can tell
We ain't gonna take you
Never did and never will
We're not gonna take you
We forsake you!
Gonna rape you!
Let's forget you, better still.
Meet the new troll --
Same as the old troll...
Grace, I think JamesI posted that information here because it is a part of his life he wanted to share with those who read this blog.
.
The song is over . . .
Hi,
I'm an investigative reporter in the San Francisco Bay Area. A newspaper has asked me to do an investigative piece on John David Schofield. I am trying to contact anyone who believes they have information linking Schofield to homsexuality.
Firsthand accounts are preferred, but I am willing to pursue leads and tips as well.
Please contact me at priskind@yahoo.com
Serious replies only, please.
Commenting by HaloScan
