Mr. Schofield, on November 16, 2007 wrote:
"Hardly a day goes by when I am not asked the question: “Are you going to take us out of the Episcopal
Church?” Such a request indicates that the individual is unaware of the limits of power or authority a bishop in The Episcopal Church has.", and, “But,” you might ask, “what about us?” We have come full circle to where we began. The question “Are you going to take us out of The Episcopal Church?” has a simple and straightforward answer. “No.” No matter what I might believe is the right thing to do, I cannot take the diocese out of The Episcopal Church.
I might add that this question was asked openly of John David on numerous occasions from the first time that JDS and Mr. Wantland (a few others) stole the name of Episcopal Church in the United States of America and his answer was always the same. (What made this time different? A woman occupied the Presiding Bishop's office.)
Mr. Schofield said this:
The vote before us, as it will be before other dioceses, is not to leave The Episcopal Church. Rather, it will be to remain within the worldwide Anglican Communion with its heritage and universally accepted teaching based on the word of God.
Yet the only Province within the United States that is in the Anglican Communion is the Episcopal Church of the United States of America. Certainly, the "province you are now a part of' has no such way of associating with the Archbishop of Canterbury. In fact, the word is that Canterbury has had no such "province" even begin the process of recognition. So, you want to be a part of the Anglican Communion you need to join the Episcopal Church of the United States of America. BTW, the Jerusalem Declaration says you don't even care. Look it up.
Well, since that was a lie, what else do you suppose might be a lie? Try this one on. In a Pastoral Letter to be read on Sunday the 18th of November Mr. Schofield said this:
According to well-informed sources, the Archbishop of Canterbury has been fully informed of the invitation of the Province of the Southern Cone and described it as a “sensible way forward.” Indeed, it is the sensible way forward and . . .
There had been no full disclosure to the Archbishop of Canterbury at that time.
In Mr. Schofield's address to the convention, prior to the vote of secession, he stated this:
For twenty years and more we have watched The Episcopal Church lose its way: straying, at first, from Scripture... to the point of dismissing the Word of God, in some instances, as mere historical documents – of value, perhaps in bygone eras – but no longer applicable to us, to appropriating powers to itself through the General Convention it had never had and, finally, on to unilateral decisions about theology, sexuality, and ordination potentially cutting itself off from the Anglican Communion."
To date, and for the foreseeable future the Episcopal Church will NOT be cut off from the Anglican Communion by the only person that matters, the Archbishop of Canterbury. And, by the way, if one reads the History of the Episcopal Church in the United States by Manross we have had these running discussions with Anglo-Catholics, Evangelicals, High Church, Low Church, everybody church since the inception of the Episcopal Church and to date no one has been "cutoff".
Hey as an interesting side note. Try this one on:
On November 16 and 17, 2006 the Steering Committee of the Global South, meeting in Chantilly, Virginia,
What, pray tell, is a province that represents South America doing holding a meeting in Virginia?! And, allowing diocese that have not even completed the process of "secession" being offered a place to hide. Yep, a bird walk I know, but just asking.
Then there is this little gem:
The Primates request, through the Presiding Bishop, that the House of Bishops of The Episcopal Church
1. make an unequivocal common covenant that the bishops will not authorise any Rite of Blessing for same-sex unions in their dioceses or through General Convention; and
The primates hold no authority in our church. In fact, the Archbishop of Canterbury describes himself as one the first of equals. There has never been a need for this type of ROMAN domination. Bishops have always been free to theological form their own diocese. If this were not the case how was Mr. Schofield able to keep from ordaining women all those twenty years? This ladies and gentlemen, is what I believe is known in some circles as a "STRAWDOG".
Found in that same document:
We also urge both parties to give assurances that no steps will be taken to alienate property from The Episcopal Church without its consent or to deny the use of that property to those congregations.Did anyone follow this little ditty? I think not. In fact, Mr. Schofield sold St. Dunstan's with the idea that he needed a "legal warchest". When next you see him, ask him where this money is?
Again, in JDS message to convention:
"If it is property that seems to be your main concern, if you are incorporated and a parish, you own your own property. You, or others before you, bought the land, built the church, have maintained the buildings and grounds, and your name is on the title deed. "
Well, it turns out in the case of St. Francis, one of the parishes that meets the above requirements, JDS not only drove out the Rector but then established a defrocked priest as the rector for the parish. When called on it all he could say was "I do not know that". And proceeded to destroy the parish family. No matter what side you are on in the debacle, you must admit that the parish family of St. Francis of Turlock is a mere shadow of its former self.
and finally, JDS ends this message with this little ditty:
"In the end, it is all about freedom."
Now that you all have had a chance to watch for over a year, is it all about freedom? Or maybe, it is about JDS continuing to be bishop beyond retirement age. Maybe it is about power and money? Maybe it is not about Anglicanism and maybe it is about "doing his own thing".
This is just the surface. If you live in San Joaquin please go back to JDS' pages and look for resources and then read all the documents again. Then make up your own mind. Is it about you and your church and your beliefs or is it about Mr. Schofield and power and money and glory and prestige?
Hey Mr. Schofield, answer the phone, it is your conscience calling!