Thinking Anglicans

wikipedia and the Presiding Bishop

The Church Times followed up on the 18 August report in the Independent Wikipedia and the art of censorship by publishing a short item last week, now on the web, authored by me, Jefferts Schori in the dark on Wikipedia edit.

Episcopal News Service picked this up and published Presiding Bishop unaware of Wikipedia edit; allegations discredited.

6
Leave a Reply

avatar
3000
6 Comment threads
0 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
6 Comment authors
L RobertsWalsinghamdave pPrior AelredK.Smith Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest
Notify of
Cheryl Clough
Guest

Glad to see these clarifications. The articles against KJS were vitriolic and cruel.

It’s nice to see that some souls don’t check their facts before they shoot their guns/mouths/typing fingers.

It’s also a relieve that staff confess their mistake rather than allowing others’ names to suffer for their own error.

Of course, those that shot first were only using “gentle” words, so there is no reason to complain to Canterbury about their misconduct, is there?

K.Smith
Guest
K.Smith

No, the claims have not been discredited. Rather, they have only been denied. And, quite poorly, I might add.

Prior Aelred
Guest

K.Smith on Sunday, 2 September 2007 at 2:06am BST —

It is my understanding that Barbara Alton, assistant to Episcopal Bishop Charles Bennison, has now admitted that Presiding Bishop Katherine Jefferts Schori did NOT tell her to delete “information concerning a cover-up of child sexual abuse, allegations that the Bishop misappropriated $11.6 million in trust funds, and evidence of other scandals.” If that count as “discredited,” then what does?

dave p
Guest

Surely the bigger point here is that people should not be able to add unsubstantiated allegation on Wikipedia in the first place.

The difference here is that liberal Episcopalians have managed to refrain from adding things like alleging Martyn Minns to be a chain smoker, child abuser and embezzler, while the likes of David Virtue (to pick an obnoxious right winger at random) and his “army” have no such scruples about alleging anything and everything.

Same goes for all the other allegations against everyone noted in the Independent article.

Walsingham
Guest
Walsingham

@K.Smith: Ah, so the person who actually did the erasing denying that ++KJS had anything to do with it is a “poor denial”. You have an interesting idea of the threshold of proof. There comes a point where certain people’s wish to find something, anything, to pin on ++KJS reaches the faintly ridiculous. I will be blunt: I wasn’t in favor of her election. But the continued efforts to destroy her reputation at any cost are frankly disgusting. David Virtue and cohorts should retract the story and apologize to ++KJS for the false accusation. That would be the Christian thing… Read more »

L Roberts
Guest
L Roberts

David Virtue and cohorts should retract the story and apologize to ++KJS for the false accusation. That would be the Christian thing to do

David Virtue caused the last minute flap about Gene Robinson that proved groundless, but caused a lot of extra work and angst for some.

DV and various other ‘commentators’ and ‘reputation destroyers’ seem loathe actually to PRACTICE Christianity on the ground. I think Jesus had a word for such religious leaders ….