Tuesday, 14 November 2006

APO: latest from San Joaquin

Updated Wednesday evening

The Living Church has two recent reports about the forthcoming diocesan convention in San Joaquin in California:
Bishop Sees San Joaquin Vote as Referendum on Separation and San Joaquin Bylaw Changes Carry Risks, Opportunities.

The full text of the message from the diocesan bishop mentioned above has not yet appeared on the diocesan website, but can be found on the Daily Episcopalian blog here.

Here is one paragraph of it:

Is Our Place In The Anglican Communion Assured? Yes. First, we have a commitment from the Southern Cone (Archbishop Greg Venebles) that the bishops of his dioceses are open to our joining their Province. Second, the Global South, representing 80 percent of the Anglican Communion, issued a public statement known as “The Kigali Communique” in which it pledged to “take initial steps toward the formation of what will be recognized as a separate ecclesiastical structure of the Anglican Communion in the USA.” Diocesan representatives have been invited to meet with Primates of the Global South November 15-17, 2006, to begin work on this plan. The Diocese could be the vanguard of a new 39th Anglican Province in North America. At present, there are seven or more dioceses lined up behind us waiting to follow our leadership example.

Further comment on this by Fr Jake in Bishop of San Joaquin Announces Plans to Leave TEC

Further comment also from Remain Episcopal, the organisation of those in San Joaquin who wish to continue in ECUSA. What are the Changes?

Posted by Simon Sarmiento on Tuesday, 14 November 2006 at 10:52pm GMT | TrackBack
You can make a Permalink to this if you like
Categorised as: ECUSA

I read the reports from "The Living Church," and took the time to watch the interview with Bishop Schofield on AnglicanTV. I read the letter to the clergy of San Joaquin. Clearly, Bishop Schofield is convicted of the rightness of his actions and the steps he is leading toward schism. With his considerations of clergy pensions and benefits, he seems to have researched many aspects of separating the diocese as institution from The Episcopal Church as institution.

Again, I don't know that there would be much point in addressing "abandonment of communion." However, it seems clear that this would lead to violation of ordination vows, both in how he violates his own and how he induces and leads other in violating theirs.

Again, it is the institutional property, and not the real property, that seems important here. It would not be enough for all of them to resign, walk out, hold another meeting, and form a new institution, a new diocese of whatever name. It is the effort to carry some sense of institutional continuity that requires these changes to canons.

Which raises a conundrum for me. It seems to acknowledge prima facie that the Diocese of San Joaquin is a creature of The Episcopal Church, and his orders as bishop, priest, and deacon are orders of the Episcopal Church, and not of some broader context. Otherwise, why would it be so important to maintain the specifics of these titles and this diocese?

Posted by: Marshall Scott on Wednesday, 15 November 2006 at 4:09am GMT

The Diocese of San Joaquin can be properly/lovingly ministered to by the authentic Episcopal Church visiting clergy from the Diocese of Los Angeles, the Diocese of Camino Real, the Diocese of California and the Diocese of Northern California on a "temporary" basis as +Schofield has clearly violated his "ordination vows."

The Diocese of San Joaquin can regroup/reshape in a timely and seamless way after the property settlements are finished.

TEC ought not play "catch" with this promoter of extreme thinking, discrimination against fellow Christians nor further "debate" the obvious deceit and feardriven hate he regularly generates in the San Joaquin Valley.

Posted by: Leonardo Ricardo on Wednesday, 15 November 2006 at 4:22pm GMT

And again, I think of my faithful Fresno Episcopalian grandparents (of blessed memory). To see what the bishop/Standing Committee is doing to their beloved church, would make them weep... :-(

[In light of what CA courts have been ruling re church property of late (God, grant your people justice!), I guess it's for the best they were *not* buried within in-church columbariums!]

Posted by: J. C. Fisher on Wednesday, 15 November 2006 at 7:08pm GMT

Ain't we surprised ;=)

But why did it take so long?

Posted by: Göran Koch-Swahne on Wednesday, 15 November 2006 at 7:44pm GMT

"Remain Episcopal in the Diocese of San Joaquin"

...has very concerned things to say about Bishop Schofield and his "dangerous" behind-the-scene manipulations:


Posted by: Leonardo Ricardo on Wednesday, 15 November 2006 at 10:45pm GMT

So if they want to leave so bad - then leave. God bless them, go in peace. But "go in peace" certainly does NOT include "go with the family silver stuffed inside your coat."

And why does +Schofield feel it necessary to make such crass, insulting statements about the faith of the vast majority of Episcopalians on his way out ?

Posted by: David Huff on Thursday, 16 November 2006 at 1:49am GMT


Please watch/listen to this revealing "Anglican TV" interview featuring +David Schofield:


Posted by: Leonardo Ricardo on Thursday, 16 November 2006 at 8:36pm GMT

"It's shrinking daily."

"The PB (FG)is the bluebird of happiness."

Seeing , as well as hearing this man, I am concerned.

Posted by: laurence roberts on Friday, 17 November 2006 at 9:12pm GMT
Post a comment

Remember personal info?

Please note that comments are limited to 400 words. Comments that are longer than 400 words will not be approved.

Cookies are used to remember your personal information between visits to the site. This information is stored on your computer and used to refill the text boxes on your next visit. Any cookie is deleted if you select 'No'. By ticking 'Yes' you agree to this use of a cookie by this site. No third-party cookies are used, and cookies are not used for analytical, advertising, or other purposes.