Comments: Schofield assets frozen by Merrill Lynch

Oh for the skill of the late Herblock, editorial cartoonist par excellance! How he would have enjoyed drawing Schofield in cope and miter, masked like a burgler, and trying to drag a bag of swag away from the diocesan offices...

Posted by Cynthia Gilliatt at Thursday, 5 June 2008 at 11:14am BST

"here is nothing in the governing documents of the Episcopal Church which forbade or limited the right of the Diocese of San Joaquin from withdrawing and taking its property with it."

What is this Dennis Canon, of which you speak?

Posted by Caelius Spinator at Thursday, 5 June 2008 at 9:19pm BST

""here is nothing in the governing documents of the Episcopal Church which forbade or limited the right of the Diocese of San Joaquin from withdrawing and taking its property with it.""

Odd that in this instance the laws of worldly society should take precedence over the 20 century tradition of the Church. I thought these people were "orthodox" and defending traditional Christianity.

Posted by Ford Elms at Friday, 6 June 2008 at 12:51am BST

The dissenters orthodoxy" seems to rely on a historical perspective that shifts from " what my grandparents believed" to "what my parents taught me" and has a heavy leavening of anger at the modern world - a bit of the Luddite perhaps - none of them have ever acknowledged that gays existed "back when everything was good" and they blithely feel all the past generations bless their actions and would recoil from the "modern". I feel the past generations attitudes have been co-opted by the conservatives without the slightest bit of discussion or dissent. Surely some of the past parishioners would be disgusted by the childish and selfish actions of the so-called conservatives/reasserters

Posted by ettu at Friday, 6 June 2008 at 12:28pm BST

"a heavy leavening of anger at the modern world"

I'd say it's dominant, overshadowing. You only have to read the posts of conservatives here to see the anger, and the fear that breeds it. And it's not just that they feel threatened by change of their own situation, it's change in general. Look at how frequently conservatives point to declining attendance in "liberal" churches. Now, I'm not arguing the numbers, but look at the unspoken assumption that declining numbers are something the "liberals" can be threatened with. "It's all your fault your Churches are empty." The only thing unexplained is why conservatives should care. I mean, if what "liberals" teach is so wrong, if they are actually a sinister cabal trying to take over the Church, undermine the Gospel, and, ultimately destroy Christianity, why should their impending demise be a concern? I would think conservatives would rejoice over it, not use it as some sort of dire threat. If the "liiberal" Churches all died off, wouldn't that just free them up to spread the true Gospel? I'd think they'd be praying for it, not portraying it as something dire. But of course, it is not that this particular thing is dire, it's that any kind of change is dire. Those conservatives who are also Evangelicals can't even acknowledge that their beliefs are actually a radical reinterpretation of the Gospel. It's as though they simply can't say, "Yes this is new, but it represents an improvement, and we believe it is a more accurate understanding" they have to deny history to deny that this change happened 500 years, so great is their fear of it.

Posted by Ford Elms at Friday, 6 June 2008 at 1:23pm BST
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.