The Right Reverend Mark Lawrence
XIV Bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of South Carolina
Diocesan House
126 Coming Street
Charleston, SC, 29403
Dear Bishop Lawrence,
I remember you from your days in the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin. You have always been opinionated but you are known for being fair, maybe even just, and I pray, merciful.
You have a Mission by the name of St. Mark's Chapel. St. Mark's is a small but growing group who would like nothing more than to simply remain Episcopalian. Thus far, you have blocked every attempt by them to stay with the Episcopal Church.
Your Communion Partner's website clearly indicates that you, personally, believe, that there are ways for alternative oversight and yet, you deny that opportunity to a group of people inside your diocese. While it does absolutely nothing for your ability to extend your oversight to other parishes in other diocese it would indicate that you at least believe what you ask others to believe.
Please be merciful and extend the opportunity for St. Mark's Chapel to be a mission that can ultimately stay within the Episcopal Church.
Sincerely,
Fred Schwartz
A Place for Discussion
Saturday, October 31, 2009
Thursday, October 29, 2009
St. Mark's Port Royal, SC is the New St. Dunstan's Modesto,CA
Good and gentle readers, lest you think I am foolish for having attempted to aide the good people at St. Mark's, Port Royal, South Carolina let me recall if you will, the strange and ugly case of St. Dunstan's Modesto, CA.
St. Dnstan's was a "mission" in the diocese of San Joaquin under the tutelage of the now deposed bishop, John David Mercer Schofield. This mission "owed" the diocese some money, about $150,000.00. The diocese, as it turned out, closed this mission ostensibly to recoup the funds owed and close a mission with "no promise". What really happened was the land and building was worth over $1.5 million and JDS was scooping up capital for the big trip down south and the subsequent legal fees he knew he would encounter. Here is the full story by none other than the righter of wrongs Mr. David Virtue.
My motivation in trying to rescue St. Mark's, well okay, simply trying to help them in some fashion was to see if we, Christ The King parish could help before St. Mark's ends up like St. Dunstan's. See, many of the St. Dunstan's people came to CTK after the debacle. Stories of all the personal items such as processional crosses that were donated to St. Dunstan's and now being sold, stained glass windows being lost to the new owner, parishioners being shunned and bad mouthed by the bishop came to us first hand. Tears, lamentations and emotional wrecks were the order of the day. The deposed bishop could care less! He had his war chest. And the worst of it is that none of that is reversible. One cannot get back that building, the land, the mission or the group of people known as St. Dunstan's. Fool that I was, I believed we at CTK in the now Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin could help another mission avoid a fate worse than death! How crazy I am! We cannot/could not help this mission because we need permission from bishops to help their diocese. Could you imagine? I surely thought that we could cut through the "red tape" to help someone who might not be there tomorrow in order to spare them from the apparent fate staring them in the face! Alas, we must stand by and watch Bishop Lawrence grind this mission into dust because we must follow the duly ordained process. How terribly sad. How pitifully depressing! How utterly useless we must be. And, how silly we must look to those who could care less. I have no idea how I am going to face those parishioners at CTK who joined us from St. Dunstan's.
St. Dnstan's was a "mission" in the diocese of San Joaquin under the tutelage of the now deposed bishop, John David Mercer Schofield. This mission "owed" the diocese some money, about $150,000.00. The diocese, as it turned out, closed this mission ostensibly to recoup the funds owed and close a mission with "no promise". What really happened was the land and building was worth over $1.5 million and JDS was scooping up capital for the big trip down south and the subsequent legal fees he knew he would encounter. Here is the full story by none other than the righter of wrongs Mr. David Virtue.
My motivation in trying to rescue St. Mark's, well okay, simply trying to help them in some fashion was to see if we, Christ The King parish could help before St. Mark's ends up like St. Dunstan's. See, many of the St. Dunstan's people came to CTK after the debacle. Stories of all the personal items such as processional crosses that were donated to St. Dunstan's and now being sold, stained glass windows being lost to the new owner, parishioners being shunned and bad mouthed by the bishop came to us first hand. Tears, lamentations and emotional wrecks were the order of the day. The deposed bishop could care less! He had his war chest. And the worst of it is that none of that is reversible. One cannot get back that building, the land, the mission or the group of people known as St. Dunstan's. Fool that I was, I believed we at CTK in the now Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin could help another mission avoid a fate worse than death! How crazy I am! We cannot/could not help this mission because we need permission from bishops to help their diocese. Could you imagine? I surely thought that we could cut through the "red tape" to help someone who might not be there tomorrow in order to spare them from the apparent fate staring them in the face! Alas, we must stand by and watch Bishop Lawrence grind this mission into dust because we must follow the duly ordained process. How terribly sad. How pitifully depressing! How utterly useless we must be. And, how silly we must look to those who could care less. I have no idea how I am going to face those parishioners at CTK who joined us from St. Dunstan's.
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
An Open Retraction of My Open Offer
This grieves me greatly. It seems that I have made a serious error in judgement in offering an opportunity for fellow Episcopalians (St. Mark's, Port Royal, South Carolina) to break loose from the chains of tyranny.To the our fellow Episcopalians, Port Royal, I am so very sorry. I truly thought we could be of some significant service.
Here is the rationale as it comes from those in the know:
Please note I do not wish to call anyone out. I am incredibly depressed at this point. It seems that we cannot even help those most in need. The bishop of the diocese in question can and is one of the Communion Partner bishops that travelled to Canterbury and came back with the offer of alternative episcopal oversight for those parishes not in concert with the Presiding Bishop and without so much as a by your leave but woe unto us if we seek to help those on the other side of the issue.
I have wondered, often times out loud, whether we could triumph on these issues. I am still not sure but I am growing more convinced that we are not. When I raised this issue, thinking that we could at least look into the matter, hopeful that we might be able to provide more than prayerful moral support, so many folks distanced themselves from this it was not even funny.
As you can read, I am confused, confounded, disappointed with so many folks and I am ready to hang it up.
Here is the rationale as it comes from those in the know:
First, Bishops cannot intercede (even with DEPO) without the invitation of the bishop with jurisdiction. Even the appearance of the interceding raises complications for us and for the parish you wish to assist. However, it appears that St. Mark’s is not currently recognized as a congregation in the Episcopal Church, and no outside intervention can create a congregation in a diocese, only the diocesan bishop can. It also appears that they have made a direct appeal to the Presiding Bishop for pastoral support and guidance who subsequently responded with the direction that they contact the president of their Province. We do not want to prejudice any ongoing discussions with +Lawrence.
Canonically and ecclesiastically there is simply no formal role for EDSJ to play or any other diocese for that matter. Thus, your offer unintentionally holds out a false hope with respect to DEPO by +Jerry. By way of our experience in EDSJ, I am aware of the damage false hopes can cause, especially around attempts to escape from a bishop seeking on taking a diocese out of the Church. However, this does not rule out or prevent expressions of encouragement and support by individuals in your parish that feel so moved.
Second, we have learned a lot about these situations and many of us have traveled far and wide to lobby for changes in how the Church responds to these crises, including the predicament of the subject parish. As a result, they have changed their procedures and handle these situations very different than how EDSJ was handled. Certainly there is more work to do in this regard, but we have changed the system in a positive way.
Third, I would note that your suggestion that we ignore procedure in favor of substance is exactly the same argument that Schofield and most of the departing group used to justify their attempted removal of the assets of The Episcopal Church. These “procedures” are critical to the orderly conduct of our common life together as a Church and protect the “substance” of Church as well, albeit imperfectly.
(for the record: I suggested that we not let form rule out over substance, as opposed to ignoring anything as suggested above).
Fourth, the best thing we can do for other dioceses (Ft. Worth, Pittsburgh, Quincy, etc.) and groups like St. Mark’s is to be very successful in recovering and rebuilding our diocese. As you know, such an effort is rather daunting and complicated by our limited financial resources.
Given the above, it is my sincere hope that you could retract or modify your blog post so as to avoid disappointment and/or unnecessary confusion.
Please note I do not wish to call anyone out. I am incredibly depressed at this point. It seems that we cannot even help those most in need. The bishop of the diocese in question can and is one of the Communion Partner bishops that travelled to Canterbury and came back with the offer of alternative episcopal oversight for those parishes not in concert with the Presiding Bishop and without so much as a by your leave but woe unto us if we seek to help those on the other side of the issue.
I have wondered, often times out loud, whether we could triumph on these issues. I am still not sure but I am growing more convinced that we are not. When I raised this issue, thinking that we could at least look into the matter, hopeful that we might be able to provide more than prayerful moral support, so many folks distanced themselves from this it was not even funny.
As you can read, I am confused, confounded, disappointed with so many folks and I am ready to hang it up.
Monday, October 26, 2009
An Open Offer to St. Mark's Chapel, Port Royal, South Carolina
To: Mr. Scott Shaffer, Warden
The Reverend Robert R. Hansel, Chaplain
St. Mark's Chapel
P. O. Box 761, Port Royal, South Carolina 29935
The Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin has just completed our 50 th Diocesan Convention. It was a joyous occasion! As you may know we have suffered mightily at the hands of now deposed John David Schofield, the mentor and confidant of your current bishop, The Right Reverend Mark Lawrence. The Parish of Christ The King in Riverbank, California is a parish that has suffered greatly as you now suffer and for many of the same reasons. We know your pain, we know the pain of isolation, we know the pain of rejection and most of all we know the pain of being alone.
We have longed for an opportunity to assist others in this type of predicament. your dilemma maybe something we can do something about. In the Presiding Bishop's letter it mentions DEPO. If you contact the Reverend Glenn Kanestrom, Rector at Christ the King Community Episcopal Church I believe that we may be able to intercede with our loving and caring bishop, The Right Reverend Jerry A. Lamb. I will be most candid, I do not know where this would lead, or even what all the issues are but I know this: No group of persons should be persecuted the way we were and the way you appear to be. We will do everything in our power to alleviate your pain and suffering. Please contact us, please challenge us to be a group of loving, caring inclusive Episcopalians.
Thank you for this great opportunity.
Contact information:
The Reverend Glenn Kanestrom
Rector, Christ The King Community Episcopal Church
6443 Estelle Ave., Riverbank, CA 95367
209-869-1075
PS: I have emailed the appropriate personages already with a copy of this letter.
The Reverend Robert R. Hansel, Chaplain
St. Mark's Chapel
P. O. Box 761, Port Royal, South Carolina 29935
The Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin has just completed our 50 th Diocesan Convention. It was a joyous occasion! As you may know we have suffered mightily at the hands of now deposed John David Schofield, the mentor and confidant of your current bishop, The Right Reverend Mark Lawrence. The Parish of Christ The King in Riverbank, California is a parish that has suffered greatly as you now suffer and for many of the same reasons. We know your pain, we know the pain of isolation, we know the pain of rejection and most of all we know the pain of being alone.
We have longed for an opportunity to assist others in this type of predicament. your dilemma maybe something we can do something about. In the Presiding Bishop's letter it mentions DEPO. If you contact the Reverend Glenn Kanestrom, Rector at Christ the King Community Episcopal Church I believe that we may be able to intercede with our loving and caring bishop, The Right Reverend Jerry A. Lamb. I will be most candid, I do not know where this would lead, or even what all the issues are but I know this: No group of persons should be persecuted the way we were and the way you appear to be. We will do everything in our power to alleviate your pain and suffering. Please contact us, please challenge us to be a group of loving, caring inclusive Episcopalians.
Thank you for this great opportunity.
Contact information:
The Reverend Glenn Kanestrom
Rector, Christ The King Community Episcopal Church
6443 Estelle Ave., Riverbank, CA 95367
209-869-1075
PS: I have emailed the appropriate personages already with a copy of this letter.
Sunday, October 25, 2009
The Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin "Gets 'er done!"
Bishop Lamb convenes "California Gold"
On Saturday, the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin met for the 50th time and wowsers, was it different! First off, the diocese passed a resolution affirming D025 from General Convention D025. With the passage of this resolution came a strange event. Our Communion Partner's Rector's parish, tried to perform an end-run by "tabling this motion" until such time as the diocesan Equality Commission could "finish its work". Note well that the representative to the Equality Commission had in a large and loud huff quit the commission a few months prior. This was the same parish that a year ago tried to gut the resolution forming the Equality Commission. At any rate, there was a discussion on the motion to table (most everyone saw right through this) and the motion was defeated. The resolution in favor of affirmation of D025 passed with some no votes but clearly a majority. In addition the affirmation of C056 passed with some no votes but with a clear majority.
Interestingly, the Equality Commission was continued due to the lack of time they had to meet. It seemed that the commission worked only about half the year and so the work is not done. By the way, their survey can be found on our website. It makes for a very interesting read -- given where we were and where we are.
A disappointment was the passing of a resolution that each parish become a welcoming and inclusive parish and that by extension our diocese become a welcoming and inclusive diocese. So few parishes think about handicapped persons! Our buildings are old and not accessible and yet no one ever thinks about the rails, the restrooms, the steps, the aisles that are blocked, the chancel areas that wheel chairs and scooters cannot get to and other issues affecting accessibility. The resolution passed but only a couple of us talked to this issue of inclusivity.
Another resolution that passed was a commitment to the MGDs. Our diocese was not even permitted to speak to these goals under the old regime. Today, most parishes not only support these goals but work actively to bring the goals to fruition.
And finally, some house keeping stuff but very important. We now allow a lay person to hold the office of Secretary to Convention, we have restructured our Standing Committee to be more flexible in numbers and we have authorized a look see on how the administrative side of the diocese can be restructured.
The Budget, wow what a disappointment! TEC, hurting themselves from the economic crash has cut support to us down to a trickle, one that must be paid back! Yep, we are authorized a loan of up to $125,000.00 "if we need it"! Let me give you but two quick examples of how this has hurt us -- significantly. First, there is not line item for youth activities. Yes, we have youth and yes there are other ways to do this but a line item demonstrates commitment! Second, our convention, just renewed and rejuvenated, has been cut from a week-end to one day.
This was how JDS controlled this diocese. He streamlined the convention and then railroaded the budget therefore no one got to meet, no one got to talk, no one got to socialize and no one knew what anyone else was doing. It was the opening salvo by JDS and his forces to "keep everyone in the dark and feed them b***s***". I am not saying that is going to happen, I am saying that the appearance is sometimes as frightening as the actual deed. I am saying that with what has happened here in San Joaquin and what is going on right now we need More time and more help than what 815 is giving us and that is a fact Jack! The damage and destruction that was foisted on this diocese will take a lot longer than 25 minutes to repair. It is not that we are ungrateful, though it may sound like it but right now a line of credit, given all our litigation and the work that needs to be done with parishes coming back, a line of credit is like throwing a drowning person an anchor instead of a life preserver.
I realize that there are limits, but for those of us who have come this far and are enthusiastic about the next 50 years -- we still need help. It will take some more time and some more money. Sorry, that is just the way it is.
Friday, October 23, 2009
And God Said, "Let There Be Light"
The 50th Annual Convention for the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin grew from spark to flame on this pleasant October evening. It was a time for sipping wine, eating a light repast and talking with old friends we had not seen for a while. It was a time for workshops including one on Education for Ministry (Wilma attended this one) and Episcopal Relief and Development and one led by +Jerry Lamb and Chancellor Michael Glass (I attended this one. There will be more on this one later) that featured "Where are We Now". 'The later referred to the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin.
It was also a time for vendors and bookstores and all sorts of things. Integrity, a group long banned from this diocese was there and visible! The old bishop (in age and in history) in the last five to ten years had few if any vendors and Integrity was never permitted. Clearly, we are different. Clearly, this diocese is beginning to live out their Christian beliefs.
Tonight, I feature a flyer from Straight for Equality. Since I am typing this I will simply say that this is a copyrighted item but since it was shared with me in physical form I feel comfortable sharing with all of you in digital form.
10 Things You Can do to Be A Straight Ally
We here in San Joaquin can now see a little better.
"God said, 'Let there be light', and there was light. God saw that light was good . . ." Genesis 1:3
More from convention later.
It was also a time for vendors and bookstores and all sorts of things. Integrity, a group long banned from this diocese was there and visible! The old bishop (in age and in history) in the last five to ten years had few if any vendors and Integrity was never permitted. Clearly, we are different. Clearly, this diocese is beginning to live out their Christian beliefs.
Tonight, I feature a flyer from Straight for Equality. Since I am typing this I will simply say that this is a copyrighted item but since it was shared with me in physical form I feel comfortable sharing with all of you in digital form.
10 Things You Can do to Be A Straight Ally
Looking for simple ways to start being a more engaged and active straight ally? Try using a few of these suggestions to build your ally skills and start creating change.
Don't forget to visit www.straightforequality.org and read the guide to being a straight ally.
1. Become informed about the realities, challenges and issues affecting the lives of gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender (GLBT) people's lives through websites, books, documentaries, and educational material (blogger note: for the bible tells me so is a great one!)
2. Be open about having gay friends, family or acquaintances that you value, respect, and are grateful to have in your life. When you talk about, them do not omit the fact they are GLBT.
3. Speak up when you hear derogatory slurs or jokes and don't tell them yourself.
4. Ask if you are unsure how a GLBT friend, family member, or acquaintance would like their significant other to be referred to or introduced, rather than avoiding acknowledgement of the relationship.
5. Help your kids learn about and appreciate all different kinds of families. Be mindful of the day-to-day messages that they are receiving about gay and transgender people and issues in school, from friend, and on TV. Talk about it with them.
6. Quit or don't join organizations that overtly discriminate. Let them know why you are leaving or not joining in the first place.
7. Support gay, lesbian, bi, and/or transgender-owned and -friendly businesses and ally businesses that have policies in place to ensure equal treatment for all.
8. Educate your church on which organizations are inclusive, and which ones aren't.
9. Write letters to the editor of your newspaper to comment as a straight ally on why you support respectful and equal treatment for GLBT people.
10. Call, write, e-mail, or visit public policy makers and let them know that as a straight person who votes, you support laws that extend equal rights and protections to all people.
We here in San Joaquin can now see a little better.
"God said, 'Let there be light', and there was light. God saw that light was good . . ." Genesis 1:3
More from convention later.
Thursday, October 22, 2009
Saturday Fireworks
By now you must be aware that the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin is meeting for the second (actually the third time) since the split. A couple of parishes have now rejoined us (TEC diocese of San Joaquin) which will make this an interesting convention. In addition, we have one of the illustrious Communion Partner Rectors in this diocese as well. If you do not remember who the Communion Partners are look them up on the web at www.communionpartners.org. There you will find our own Rev. Rob Eaton. These are the folks who think they can be Episcopalian and not live by the constitution canons and prayerbook of TEC. With this cast of characters located in the heart of the "get us out of the United Nations" territory we have the following three resolutions:
http://s3.amazonaws.com/dfc_attachments/public/documents/421/ResolutionR-09-01EqualityCommission.pdf
This resolution continues the Equality Commission from our first formal convention in which the delegates, tired of John David Schofield's mean-spiritedness authorized the beginnings of a change to reconcile those previously marginalized including gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender persons, women, and various ethnic communities. Unfortunately the handicapped are still not included, at least not in this resolution. Father Rob Eaton and the gang from the Communion Partners tried to gut this resolution when it hit the floor by providing a substitute resolution but it did not work. Their representative to this commission quit in a huge huff. Should be exciting.
Then there is this one:
http://s3.amazonaws.com/dfc_attachments/public/documents/424/ResolutionR-09-04AffirmD025.pdf
This is a resolution to affirm the GC Resolution D025.
Then there is this resolution:
http://s3.amazonaws.com/dfc_attachments/public/documents/425/ResolutionR-09-05AffirmC056.pdf
which affirms the General Convention Resolution C056.
Please pray for the convention delegates because these issues are so very important and we are such a fledgling diocese and 10 things can go wrong and 9 of them are not very good.
More as things unfold. Check back beginning on Friday night.
http://s3.amazonaws.com/dfc_attachments/public/documents/421/ResolutionR-09-01EqualityCommission.pdf
This resolution continues the Equality Commission from our first formal convention in which the delegates, tired of John David Schofield's mean-spiritedness authorized the beginnings of a change to reconcile those previously marginalized including gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender persons, women, and various ethnic communities. Unfortunately the handicapped are still not included, at least not in this resolution. Father Rob Eaton and the gang from the Communion Partners tried to gut this resolution when it hit the floor by providing a substitute resolution but it did not work. Their representative to this commission quit in a huge huff. Should be exciting.
Then there is this one:
http://s3.amazonaws.com/dfc_attachments/public/documents/424/ResolutionR-09-04AffirmD025.pdf
This is a resolution to affirm the GC Resolution D025.
Then there is this resolution:
http://s3.amazonaws.com/dfc_attachments/public/documents/425/ResolutionR-09-05AffirmC056.pdf
which affirms the General Convention Resolution C056.
Please pray for the convention delegates because these issues are so very important and we are such a fledgling diocese and 10 things can go wrong and 9 of them are not very good.
More as things unfold. Check back beginning on Friday night.
Convention Daze
[Delegates for the 50th Annual Convention are showing up early this year.]
It is that time of the year again! Yep, the 50th Annual Convention of the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin wi8ll begin Friday Night! The nugget hidden within the three days is meant to be the visioning process. This will be something akin to "What do we want to be when we grow up?", or at least an answer to that question. That will occur on Saturday. Friday night will be a friendly get together with goodies and of course a little nectar. Along with that will be the vendors row and a series of workshops. along with "Where are we Now" and "Episcopal Health and Pension Benefits" will be "Education for Ministry". Friday night will be interesting but the main business will be done on Saturday. A couple of issues will be up for discussion including a report by a commission on the marginalization of many groups including LGBT and handicapped groups. What has been done in the past and what we ought to be doing. Also, from a practical standpoint, I think we will get a glimpse of what a "shared diocesan administration" might look like. Saturday night we will have an evening repast accompanied by a report from General Convention delegates on GC 2009, that should spark some interest!
I will try to post from the convention floor, or balcony or sidewalk or street corner depending on how close some folks will let me get to the action.
Keep watch as this may be an interesting second go-around for us. We have many issues that will begin to collide inclduing the first couple of groups back from "the dead" as it were. Yes, we have had two parishes return to the fold and will have full voting rights for this convention. This action should make for some interesting discussions on the floor!
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
Nothin' from Nothin' Leaves Vatican
Well, something is amiss. Everybody is talking about the "opportunity" to have an ordinariate within the Roman Catholic Church. As Fr. Mark points out,
"This process is presented as part of the ecumenical hope for the reunion of Christians into one body, but it really is that hope made a dream, the Roman dream that all Christians might finally return to one church, the Roman Catholic Church. It is a dream of the past, not of the future. The ecumenical hope is not reunion with Rome, but reunion with one another in Christ. This thing is no part of it."
Here is the first verse:
Ode To Pope Benedict
Nothin' from nothin' leaves the Vatican
You gotta have somethin'
If you wanna be with me
Nothin' from nothin' leaves the Vaticn
You gotta have something
If you wanna be with Benny
We have done this to ourselves. Yes, because we, the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion, were unable to use the process of reflective and prayerful consensus effectively we now have choices like:
1, be devoured by ACNA,
2, be devoured by the Roman Church, or
3, drift into oblivion.
All really great choices folks. I would like to start by thanking my clergy, particularly the deposed bishop and his cronies for a major portion of this screw up. We could have sat in convention and when faced with difficult decisions prayed and then returned to discussion. What's that you say, that would never work? Well I have been on at least 3 different vestries that worked on prayerful consensus and it ALWAYS worked!
Then I would like to thank the current clergy and power structure of the Episcopal Church and more specifically the now, Archbishop of Canterbury (and the entire Anglican communion), soon to be priest in charge. Faced with devastating issues in multiple diocese, San Joaquin, Forth Worth, Pittsburgh, etc. as well as worldwide issues and challenges from small-minded, narrow thinking, petty little men, we have seemed to flounder and stumble through at least the beginnings of these times allowing the "ship" to drift aimlessly -- at least for a while, and we have never recovered (yet) from that drift. As a result, the Roman Church has seen our folly and "come to our rescue".
Next, let's thank ARCIC (both Roman and Anglican) for leaving us hanging with but one more issue to resolve. It would have been so simple for the ARCIC to simply agree to bring the Anglican Communion on board as a "Rite" such as the Coptics. We could have been the "English Rite" and been reunited in a heart beat (and on an equal footing) but, we began to fight publicly. Oh and, no one has the guts to deal with the Pope. Talk about the elephant in the room. Read Garry Wills. There weren't just bad popes, there were evil popes, there were popes who bought the office, who were married into the office and who gained the office by birth(?). Now, the one stumbling block becomes the vehicle by which we are "saved"?
So, here is the next verse:
I'm not tryin' to be your hero
'Cause that zero is too cold for me, Brrr
I'm not tryin' to be your highness
'Cause that minus is too low to see, yeah
So the arm that is outstreatched has a poison apple in it -- All one needs to do is take a bite -- and sleep for the rest of your life!
Nothin' from nothin' leaves the Vatican
And I'm not stuffin'
Believe you me
Don't you remember I told ya
I'm a soldier in the war for oppression, yeah
Yes, I am
Well, here ya go:
So, here we sit. Shall we just take a bite and end it all or shall we get serious and begin to resolve what ails us, build on our strengths and step out in faith. We are certainly, as I believe the Episcopal Church is certainly, overdue!
"This process is presented as part of the ecumenical hope for the reunion of Christians into one body, but it really is that hope made a dream, the Roman dream that all Christians might finally return to one church, the Roman Catholic Church. It is a dream of the past, not of the future. The ecumenical hope is not reunion with Rome, but reunion with one another in Christ. This thing is no part of it."
Here is the first verse:
Ode To Pope Benedict
Nothin' from nothin' leaves the Vatican
You gotta have somethin'
If you wanna be with me
Nothin' from nothin' leaves the Vaticn
You gotta have something
If you wanna be with Benny
We have done this to ourselves. Yes, because we, the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion, were unable to use the process of reflective and prayerful consensus effectively we now have choices like:
1, be devoured by ACNA,
2, be devoured by the Roman Church, or
3, drift into oblivion.
All really great choices folks. I would like to start by thanking my clergy, particularly the deposed bishop and his cronies for a major portion of this screw up. We could have sat in convention and when faced with difficult decisions prayed and then returned to discussion. What's that you say, that would never work? Well I have been on at least 3 different vestries that worked on prayerful consensus and it ALWAYS worked!
Then I would like to thank the current clergy and power structure of the Episcopal Church and more specifically the now, Archbishop of Canterbury (and the entire Anglican communion), soon to be priest in charge. Faced with devastating issues in multiple diocese, San Joaquin, Forth Worth, Pittsburgh, etc. as well as worldwide issues and challenges from small-minded, narrow thinking, petty little men, we have seemed to flounder and stumble through at least the beginnings of these times allowing the "ship" to drift aimlessly -- at least for a while, and we have never recovered (yet) from that drift. As a result, the Roman Church has seen our folly and "come to our rescue".
Next, let's thank ARCIC (both Roman and Anglican) for leaving us hanging with but one more issue to resolve. It would have been so simple for the ARCIC to simply agree to bring the Anglican Communion on board as a "Rite" such as the Coptics. We could have been the "English Rite" and been reunited in a heart beat (and on an equal footing) but, we began to fight publicly. Oh and, no one has the guts to deal with the Pope. Talk about the elephant in the room. Read Garry Wills. There weren't just bad popes, there were evil popes, there were popes who bought the office, who were married into the office and who gained the office by birth(?). Now, the one stumbling block becomes the vehicle by which we are "saved"?
So, here is the next verse:
I'm not tryin' to be your hero
'Cause that zero is too cold for me, Brrr
I'm not tryin' to be your highness
'Cause that minus is too low to see, yeah
So the arm that is outstreatched has a poison apple in it -- All one needs to do is take a bite -- and sleep for the rest of your life!
Nothin' from nothin' leaves the Vatican
And I'm not stuffin'
Believe you me
Don't you remember I told ya
I'm a soldier in the war for oppression, yeah
Yes, I am
Well, here ya go:
So, here we sit. Shall we just take a bite and end it all or shall we get serious and begin to resolve what ails us, build on our strengths and step out in faith. We are certainly, as I believe the Episcopal Church is certainly, overdue!
Friday, October 16, 2009
Saturday, October 10, 2009
Mullins - San Joaquin - Bishops
Mullins in his deposition in Fort Worth (he also submitted a similar document in the San Joaquin case) establishes The Episcopal Church as a hierarchical church. Much has been made of this by the orthodites but the fact remains, The Episcopal Church is a hierarchical church. The General convention, the Constitution, the canons and the Book of common Prayer are THE KEYS to the TEC kingdom.
Much these days is being written about bishops. See Father Jake's post or Preludium At Father Jake's place he asks about "your impressions of bishops". Here, we are going to do a little more than that.
William White, in his writings really questioned the need for a bishop. Initially at least he leaned toward the concept that bishops were superfluous at best and a hindrance at worst. White, in his work The Case of The Episcopal Churches Considered was the chief architect of the House of Deputies, i.e., legislative body that included laity. Keep in mind that the first convention actually met without bishops. Fortunately, or unfortunately, it was the Connecticut church that insisted on an episcopacy. It was their movement that culminated with the consecration of Seabury by Bishops in Scotland. After that, the bicameral legislature of the General convention was established with the House of Bishops.
So we have Bishops and they have a significant say in what goes on. They are, subject to the following," to guard the faith, unity, and discipline of the Church" and "to share with [his or her] fellow bishops in the government of the whole church". Here is a question I have: How did we get from a "pastor to the pastors" to running a national church? What classes in seminary do they take to make them particularly gifted in governance? What classes do they take that make them particularly gifted in administration? Are most bishops selected for their "pastoral abilities" ? We go from gee we need a bishop to handing over the keys to the car? Let's look at a couple of these.
The now bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin spent more time in the last 4 or 5 years outside the diocese than inside. He worried less about pastoring to the clergy, his primary job, to "wordsmithing" fraudulent corporate documents (The Protestant Episcopal Church In the United States of America, articles of incorporation). He stacked the clergy inside the diocese of San Joaquin and just what classes and what experiences made him qualified to do personnel selections?
How about the esteemed +John Guernsey? Wanted to be bishop so bad he could taste it. The perceived power, the real power, the ability to flaunt and to be arrogant are hard to pass up for some folks. He simply took advantage of the opportunities presented to become a "powerful person" in the church.
Now, from personal experience I grew up with at least one bishop. A Maryknoll that was focused on one thing, pastoring to the millions of folks who needed it. He was quiet, unassuming, and a blessing from God. So yes, I do know bishops that are everything they are supposed to be.
So, let's par down to a lot fewer bishops and let's make the position a servant-leader position as opposed to what it is today. Perhaps, since some folks like "numbers" one bishop per state. That ought to keep them all busy all day every day. Secondly, let's relegate the House of Bishops to a lessor status and elevate the House of Deputies to a more influential status with more lay participation. Bishops should be pastors to the clergy, let the regular priests do confirmations and the likes, let the bishops take care of the clergy. Let parishes hire and fire clergy without any consent from the bishop. Let the General Convention take care of the rest.
Much these days is being written about bishops. See Father Jake's post or Preludium At Father Jake's place he asks about "your impressions of bishops". Here, we are going to do a little more than that.
William White, in his writings really questioned the need for a bishop. Initially at least he leaned toward the concept that bishops were superfluous at best and a hindrance at worst. White, in his work The Case of The Episcopal Churches Considered was the chief architect of the House of Deputies, i.e., legislative body that included laity. Keep in mind that the first convention actually met without bishops. Fortunately, or unfortunately, it was the Connecticut church that insisted on an episcopacy. It was their movement that culminated with the consecration of Seabury by Bishops in Scotland. After that, the bicameral legislature of the General convention was established with the House of Bishops.
So we have Bishops and they have a significant say in what goes on. They are, subject to the following," to guard the faith, unity, and discipline of the Church" and "to share with [his or her] fellow bishops in the government of the whole church". Here is a question I have: How did we get from a "pastor to the pastors" to running a national church? What classes in seminary do they take to make them particularly gifted in governance? What classes do they take that make them particularly gifted in administration? Are most bishops selected for their "pastoral abilities" ? We go from gee we need a bishop to handing over the keys to the car? Let's look at a couple of these.
The now bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin spent more time in the last 4 or 5 years outside the diocese than inside. He worried less about pastoring to the clergy, his primary job, to "wordsmithing" fraudulent corporate documents (The Protestant Episcopal Church In the United States of America, articles of incorporation). He stacked the clergy inside the diocese of San Joaquin and just what classes and what experiences made him qualified to do personnel selections?
How about the esteemed +John Guernsey? Wanted to be bishop so bad he could taste it. The perceived power, the real power, the ability to flaunt and to be arrogant are hard to pass up for some folks. He simply took advantage of the opportunities presented to become a "powerful person" in the church.
Now, from personal experience I grew up with at least one bishop. A Maryknoll that was focused on one thing, pastoring to the millions of folks who needed it. He was quiet, unassuming, and a blessing from God. So yes, I do know bishops that are everything they are supposed to be.
So, let's par down to a lot fewer bishops and let's make the position a servant-leader position as opposed to what it is today. Perhaps, since some folks like "numbers" one bishop per state. That ought to keep them all busy all day every day. Secondly, let's relegate the House of Bishops to a lessor status and elevate the House of Deputies to a more influential status with more lay participation. Bishops should be pastors to the clergy, let the regular priests do confirmations and the likes, let the bishops take care of the clergy. Let parishes hire and fire clergy without any consent from the bishop. Let the General Convention take care of the rest.
Thursday, October 8, 2009
Mullin's Deposition, The prayerbook and San Joaquin
Part II of our continuing discussion of the Mullins Deposition and its meaningfulness to the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin begins with the prayerbook. John David Schofield has on many occasions and in various public and private settings complained longly and loudly about the 1979 Prayerbook. Let's examine this complaint in light of the deposition given by Bruce Mullin. This deposition is available on Preludium and I urge you to read it all. I also encourage everyone to read The History of the Episcopal Church by Manross.
Mullins states,
Then Bishop John David Schofield comes along, some 20 to 30 years later and says he personally has significant issues with the Book of Common Prayer. During the last four or so years before the schismatic move JDS he railed on three major issues: Women's Ordination; LGBT full inclusion, and the errant Book of Common Prayer. The prayerbook creates uniformity in worship. Apparently JDS did not like the uniformity and so, lo and behold the GAFCON people adopt the 1662 prayerbook as their official Book of Common Prayer. In effect, not only does he reject a major governing document established from the beginning of the Episcopal Church (1789) but rejects the American Revolution and goes back to swearing allegiance to the crown of England!
Can a bishop do this? Can a bishop that does this stay a bishop in the United States? Does this person now fall under the Patriot Act? These are all questions that will be answered in the near future.
Folks in the Anglican Diocese of San Joaquin -- is this what you wanted to do?
Mullins states,
"The General Convention meets at least once every three years to establish the policies, rules, and programs of the Church. It has adopted and from time to time amends the Church's governing documents, its Constitution, canons, and Book of Common Prayer."Further in Mullin talks about the ability of any diocese to use a proposed/revised Book of Common Prayer only until such time as the First General Convention. Clearly the Book of Common Prayer is one of the governing documents of The Episcopal Church in the United States of America.
Then Bishop John David Schofield comes along, some 20 to 30 years later and says he personally has significant issues with the Book of Common Prayer. During the last four or so years before the schismatic move JDS he railed on three major issues: Women's Ordination; LGBT full inclusion, and the errant Book of Common Prayer. The prayerbook creates uniformity in worship. Apparently JDS did not like the uniformity and so, lo and behold the GAFCON people adopt the 1662 prayerbook as their official Book of Common Prayer. In effect, not only does he reject a major governing document established from the beginning of the Episcopal Church (1789) but rejects the American Revolution and goes back to swearing allegiance to the crown of England!
Can a bishop do this? Can a bishop that does this stay a bishop in the United States? Does this person now fall under the Patriot Act? These are all questions that will be answered in the near future.
Folks in the Anglican Diocese of San Joaquin -- is this what you wanted to do?
Saturday, October 3, 2009
Mullins Deposition: San Joaquin Style
Interestingly enough the Mullins Deposition published by Father Mark Harris over at Preludium is not identical to the document submitted to the California Courts. Well, it is in substance but the length of the deposition submitted here was quite different (longer) than the one submitted in Fort Worth. The Mullins document (document will be used to distinguish the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin submission from the Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth [deposition]) was used in the move to summary judgement sought and won by the EDSJ. My best guess is that in each diocese that is under attack the Mullins document/deposition will take on the flavor of the diocese, i.e., it will meet the unique needs of that Episcopal diocese but the sum and substance will remain the same. It is that sum and substance that I will address in this series of articles.
What exactly do I mean by sum and substance? Well, I do not wish to take on the historical nature of the document as much as I would like to address the issues raised by the now infamous Mr. John David Mercer Schofield. I wish to address the history, recent history of this diocese and its actions based on the issues raised by the wannabe Anglicans (far as I know they are not accepted as part of the Anglican Communion even though they think they are). In other words, I will track the deposition and the actions of TEC and then compare them to the actions of John David Schofield and his minions in what is now some far fetched church that claims to be in communion with the Archbishop of Canterbury but has not been recognized as such.
So, let's begin with the entire document. The document describes in excruciating detail the history and corresponding legacy of the Episcopal Church in the United States of America. It speaks to the General Convention, the Canons and the Constitution and the prayer Book. It discusses every aspect of the life and times of the Episcopal Church in the United States. It provides clear rationale for every action generally contested by those who would tear apart the fabric of The Episcopal Church.
The major opening point to be made here in the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin is that despite the determination to ordain women years ago JDS refused to do so. This did not lead to much of anything on either side of the aisle BUT when The Episcopal Church elected a female Presiding Bishop, suddenly, he and his cronies just had to leave. Make no mistake and do not be mislead by what one says. What one says and what one does are two very different things. He/They say the issue is one of moral issues having to do with LGBT but nothing ever really happened until ++Schori was elected. The fact is there are a group of men in our church that just cannot take orders from women and they will go to great lengths to avoid it. Before, JDS and cronies said all sorts of things but that was under Frank Griswold. They parried but never did anything seriously. Suddenly, after ++Schori's election, the "issues" become too great and they MUST leave. keep in mind that the issue of sexual orientation was decided in 1994! But, they MUST leave now, after the election of a women. Methinks ye doth protest too much Mr. Schofield, Mr. Duncan and Mr. Iker.
Much more later.
What exactly do I mean by sum and substance? Well, I do not wish to take on the historical nature of the document as much as I would like to address the issues raised by the now infamous Mr. John David Mercer Schofield. I wish to address the history, recent history of this diocese and its actions based on the issues raised by the wannabe Anglicans (far as I know they are not accepted as part of the Anglican Communion even though they think they are). In other words, I will track the deposition and the actions of TEC and then compare them to the actions of John David Schofield and his minions in what is now some far fetched church that claims to be in communion with the Archbishop of Canterbury but has not been recognized as such.
So, let's begin with the entire document. The document describes in excruciating detail the history and corresponding legacy of the Episcopal Church in the United States of America. It speaks to the General Convention, the Canons and the Constitution and the prayer Book. It discusses every aspect of the life and times of the Episcopal Church in the United States. It provides clear rationale for every action generally contested by those who would tear apart the fabric of The Episcopal Church.
The major opening point to be made here in the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin is that despite the determination to ordain women years ago JDS refused to do so. This did not lead to much of anything on either side of the aisle BUT when The Episcopal Church elected a female Presiding Bishop, suddenly, he and his cronies just had to leave. Make no mistake and do not be mislead by what one says. What one says and what one does are two very different things. He/They say the issue is one of moral issues having to do with LGBT but nothing ever really happened until ++Schori was elected. The fact is there are a group of men in our church that just cannot take orders from women and they will go to great lengths to avoid it. Before, JDS and cronies said all sorts of things but that was under Frank Griswold. They parried but never did anything seriously. Suddenly, after ++Schori's election, the "issues" become too great and they MUST leave. keep in mind that the issue of sexual orientation was decided in 1994! But, they MUST leave now, after the election of a women. Methinks ye doth protest too much Mr. Schofield, Mr. Duncan and Mr. Iker.
Much more later.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)