The Panel could get busy very quickly !!

I see that that "nice" "liberal" Bishop Smith of Connetticut swooped on one of the churches that are out of communion with him yesterday..

Arriving with legal papers he deposed the rector, overruled the vestry (church council), took away the keys to the buildings, had their website taken down, and imposed a new priest (a nice liberal on I bet)!

Good timing ?

See: "Ephraim Radner: The Rev. Mark Hansen's inhibition: What is to be done?" at http://www.ctsix.org/

"Schemes for extended, delegated or shared episcopal ministry considered by the Panel include those of the Anglican Church of Canada, the Church of England, the Scottish Episcopal Church, and the Episcopal Church (USA)."

So (it appears), where liberal majorities have agreed to accommodate conservative minorities, the liberal majorities will be put on trial (excuse me, "considered").

. . . but where liberal (and/or LGBT) minorities don't even dare say a peep (for fear church or even church-state repression), that's not on the table?

Assume crash positions. :-/

Bp. Smith didn't "swoop down" on the parish. The rector decided that he would be taking sabbatical for an unspecified period of time, without informing the Bishop - and basically left, ignoring his responsibilities to both the parish and the diocese.

The real story can be found at:

http://www.dfms.org/3577_63671_ENG_HTM.htm

Perhaps you should check your sources before you spread FUD about such a sensitive issue...

And for details of what really happened, without the conservative spin

http://www.episcopalchurch.org/3577_63671_ENG_HTM.htm?menu=undefined

Too bad Bp. Smith stopped with just Hansen. The other five deserve to be deposed as well. Any time Bob Duncans sticks up for someone, you know they deserve to be kicked to the curb. It'll be Bob's turn next year after GC 2006. As much as I want to believe he might turn around before then, I don't see it in the cards. And, as much as we're not suppose to take delight in the downfall of another, I can't help but admit that I'll enjoy seeing Duncan get what's coming to him for all the torture he's put the church through.

Simeon wrote: "Bp. Smith didn't "swoop down" on the parish. The rector decided that he would be taking sabbatical for an unspecified period of time, without informing the Bishop - and basically left, ignoring his responsibilities to both the parish and the diocese."

Hi Simeon - Apparently Hansen had made pastoral arrangements for the church during his sabbatical, and had informed the Bishop's assistant.

If Bishop Smith was only interested in providing adequate pastoral care for the church why didn't he just call the lay leaders together to agree a way forward? Why did he arrive unannounced with a large diocesan team, reject the protests of the church's senior warden, change the locks on the building and take down their website ? This was not just the provision of new pastoral care, it was a take-over of the church - overriding the lay leadership and membership as well as clergy.

This is why these "nice liberal" provinces need external oversight: they tolerate leaders who reject Christian beliefs, they promulgate things the bible teaches to be immoral, and they persecute faithful Christians who reject their authority to do these things. Only a couple of months ago a large faithful Anglican church in Texas were told to leave their building by the local bishop because they informed him that they could no longer accept ECUSAs authority in such matters.

They had built and paid for the building themselves only four years earlier! ECUSA's elite, and contributors here, seem to hate Christians who aren't liberal.

Following Bishop Smith's example, maybe the Commmunion should send a delegation to 815 in New York, demand the keys, take down ECUSA's website and impose a Presiding Bishop to sort out the mess.

Once more we see the flagrant bias of ECNS. For a more balanced view of what is going on in ECUSA you need to read Kendall Harmon's TITUSONENINE as well.

"balance" = "Kendall Harmon"???

The way "FOX News" is "fair and balanced"!

(For those of you not Yanks, FOX is the TV-network organ of the Bush Administration)

Dave wrote: "they tolerate leaders who reject Christian beliefs, they promulgate things the bible teaches to be immoral,"

Presenting your *opinion* as fact, and with such inflamed rhetoric, isn't doing the situation any good and is downright insulting as well.

"and they persecute faithful Christians"

I'm sure most of the parishoners there are faithful, at least as well as any of us can be - but they aren't being "persecuted." They are being disagreed with by their Bishop, who has every right under church canons to do as he has done. Was it the best way to handle the situation ? I really don't know - but neither you nor I are there, and can't know the whole story.

flabellum suggested, "For a more balanced view of what is going on in ECUSA you need to read Kendall Harmon's TITUSONENINE."

Yeah, right. Like you need to watch Al Jazeera to get a "balanced view" on Islamic terrorists, or visit N. Korea to get a "balanced view" on free democracies... :-P

"Once more we see the flagrant bias of ECNS. For a more balanced view of what is going on in ECUSA you need to read Kendall Harmon's TITUSONENINE as well."

Take that, Simon!

:-)

Tim, I distinguish between the material that Kendall Harmon posts on his blog, and the comments that his readers make on those items.

While Kendall makes no secret of his own strongly held opinions, he does post links to many materials that do not support his own views.

You might also take a look at what the Connecticut Six say themselves about the situation:

http://www.ctsix.org/

(It includes links to a large number of reports)

"flabellum suggested, "For a more balanced view of what is going on in ECUSA you need to read Kendall Harmon's TITUSONENINE."

Yeah, right. Like you need to watch Al Jazeera to get a "balanced view" on Islamic terrorists, or visit N. Korea to get a "balanced view" on free democracies... :-P"

No, actually you can get the balanced view on these ('absolute truth') from Jennie Tepa's group in ACC.

It seems to me that our *liberal* contributors are unwilling to discuss the substance of what happened; instead just diverting attention to opinions about the bias of the various reports.

I would like to hear JCF, MM, Charlotte, Simeon et al address the facts. Or are they unwilling to defend Smiths agression ?

1. Are not the "CT six" reacting as the bulk of the rest of the Anglican world has reacted. ie Are not they, rather han Smith, the faithful Anglicans ?
2. As Bishop Smith is supporting the purported consecration of a bishop in a homo-sexual relationship, and the blessing of homo-sexual relationships, which all the Anglican "Instruments of Unity" agree are "incompatible with scripture" what right has he to (mis)use Canon law to persecute faithful Anglican priests and believers ?
3. Even if Hansen has taken extended sabbatical and had not followed (advisory) procedures, why was it reasonable in these circumstances for Bishop Smith to bring a diocesan team unannounced with legal papers to deposed the him, rather than do it through the normal channels ?
4. What justification for Smith to overrule the senior warden and vestry (church council) rather than work with them ?
5. What justification for changimg the locks and taking away the keys to the buildings ?
6. What justification for taking down their website ?
7. What justification for imposing a new priest without consultation ?
8. If Bishop Smith was only interested in providing adequate pastoral care for the church why didn't he just call the lay leaders together to agree a way forward?

Can you please give us some reasoned answers ?

For the record, Fr. Hansen has not been deposed. He has been inhibited for six months. He could be deposed at that time, or not. There's nothing that requires Bp. Smith to move on to deposition. One can come back from inhibition. One cannot come back from deposition.

Faithfully,
Lois Keen, Priest, St. Martin's, Boothwyn PA

JC Fisher said:

". . . but where liberal (and/or LGBT) minorities don't even dare say a peep (for fear church or even church-state repression), that's not on the table?"

This would be pretty hard to judge, if by your own admission they're too afraid to say anything. Personally I would be fascinated to find out about the experiences of people who self-identify as LGB or T who are part of conservative Anglican provinces e.g. Uganda, West Indies, Nigeria. I have never come across anything in that line and that is surely a great pity. Would appreciate any pointers.

However, it seems pretty obvious that if as you allege any churches are repressing such folk then that should be brought urgently into the public sphere since all the bishops, primates and their provinces have repeatedly and strongly spoken out against homophobic violence and the like and have pledged themselves to listen to people's experiences. If there is evidence on this there should absolutely be some kind of inquiry and we would soon see if it was just hypocritical rhetoric or genuinely "loving the sinner whilst hating the sin".

As I thought; no liberal can give a reasoned answer to my questions about the *facts* of what Bp Smith is doing.

Come on guys; lost for words ?

Given, Dave, that neither you or I are in the parish or the diocese concerned, and have not spoken to both sides, anything we say will be conjecture.

I would choose to believe ENS over the partial, hostile conservative blogs quoted here. But I can't answer those questions, and you are not asking them from any point of knowledge, purely the position of the conservatives involved, which you have clearly swallowed wholesale.

Occasionally, Dave, I have a Real Life away from TA. ;-/

But even if I didn't, I am not going to play your "when did you stop beating your wife" games.

Bishop Smith doesn't answer to you, Dave (rather to the General Convention/House of Bishops, and *God*).

And neither do I.

Dear Merseymike and JCFisher, I'm sad about your responses. It seems to me that you don't care, as long as your side is winning..