Thinking Anglicans

Virginia: two more news reports

From the Richmond Times-Dispatch
Ruling reversed in church dispute
Update and another version of this on Saturday, Judge reverses ruling to dismiss church lawsuits.

From the Falls Church News-Press
1st Court Ruling After Defections Favors Continuing Episcopalians

4
Leave a Reply

avatar
3000
4 Comment threads
0 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
3 Comment authors
JCFRobinKevin Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest
Notify of
Kevin
Guest
Kevin

These stories reveal more about the position of the journalist than the actual ruling. The ruling was one in which everybody can declare victory. CANA can declare victory because TEC dropped the vestry and clergy as defendants. TEC can declare victory because the suit moves to trial.

I had no doubt this would move trial for the nature of the case & importance of legal issues the arguments would have to be heard.

JCF
Guest
JCF

I can’t get that Fall Church News-Press link to work—but by “Continuing Episcopalians”, do they mean, well, *Episcopalians* (i.e., the Diocese of Virginia)?

The term “Continuing” there (usually used of schismatic groups “not in communion” w/ the ABC—hello, CANA?) threw me for a loop.

Robin
Guest
Robin

The FCNP reference to the “Continuing Episcopalians” is a reference to the Episcopalians in Falls Church that voted NOT to leave TEC. The group that decided to stay with TEC were referred to as the “continuing Episcopalians” for a while after the vote because having a church and a city of the same name got very confusing. Now, the Anglicans have changed the sign outside of the church to just say “Falls Church Anglican” and the sign hanging on the Presbyterian Church (where the episcopal congregation meets each Sunday) says “Falls Church Episcopal Church”. It’s a temporary sign…only there until… Read more »

JCF
Guest
JCF

“Now, the Anglicans have changed the sign outside of the church to just say ‘Falls Church Anglican'”

Robin, I think you mean the “CANA-ites” * (my term). Whether they’re Anglican or not—actually, just what “Anglican” means anymore!—is still entirely an open question. :-/

[* Might I say “CANA-nites”? Or, in light of what the Hebrew Scriptures say about the former, is that TOO prejudicial? ;-)]