It begins

[Groce]

San Joaquin is leaving now. Looks like Ft. Worth will be soon.

“We now have two separate religions in the Episcopal Church,” Schofield said. “The Episcopal Church has become an apostate to the point of heresy.”


Schori responds "I must strongly urge you to consider the consequences of such action, not only for yourself but especially for all of the Episcopalians under your pastoral charge and care."

[/URL]
[URL="http://titusonenine.classicalanglican.net/?p=16308"] (http://titusonenine.classicalanglican.net/?p=16316)

one commenter said in response to her letter
“uphold the doctrine, discipline, and worship of Christ as this Church has received them, Ironic, huh?"

[JoshuaCh1v9]

As we say round here....

trouble at t'Mill

[AngCath]

Pray for the Church :crossrc:

[Iosias]

San Joaquin is leaving now. Looks like Ft. Worth will be soon.

“We now have two separate religions in the Episcopal Church,” Schofield said. “The Episcopal Church has become an apostate to the point of heresy.”


Schori responds "I must strongly urge you to consider the consequences of such action, not only for yourself but especially for all of the Episcopalians under your pastoral charge and care."




one commenter said in response to her letter
“uphold the doctrine, discipline, and worship of Christ as this Church has received them, Ironic, huh?"

Could we have some background for us foreigners? Isn't Schori the bishop of ECUSA?

[gtsecc]

Here is Katherine's letter. Ironically, she makes the case for preserving the faith, which is actually what San Joaquin has done, and Katherine has not. (BTW, Joaquim and Anna are the parents of the BVM) Bolding is mine.

November 20, 2006
The Rt. Rev. John-David Schofield
Diocese of San Joaquin
4159 E. Dakota Avenue
Fresno, California 93726
My dear brother:
I have seen reports of your letter to parishes in the Diocese of San Joaquin, which apparently urges delegates to your upcoming Diocesan Convention to take action to leave the Episcopal Church. I would ask you to confirm the accuracy of those reports. If true, you must be aware that such action would likely be seen as a violation of your ordination vows to “uphold the doctrine, discipline, and worship of Christ as this Church has received them.” I must strongly urge you to consider the consequences of such action, not only for yourself but especially for all of the Episcopalians under your pastoral charge and care.
I certainly understand that you personally disagree with decisions by General Conventions over the past 30 and more years. You have, however, taken vows three times over that period to uphold the “doctrine, discipline, and worship of the Episcopal Church.” If you now feel that you can no longer do so, the more honorable course would be to renounce your orders in this Church and seek a home elsewhere. Your public assertion that your duty is to violate those vows puts many, many people at hazard of profound spiritual violence. I urge you, as a pastor, to consider that hazard with the utmost gravity.
As you contemplate this action I would also remind you of the trust which you and I both hold for those who have come before and those who will come after us. None of us has received the property held by the Church today to use as we will. We have received it as stewards, for those who enjoy it today and those who will be blessed by the ministry its use will permit in the future. Our forebears did not build churches or give memorials with the intent that they be removed from the Episcopal Church. Nor did our forebears give liberally to fund endowments with the intent that they be consumed by litigation.
The Church will endure whatever decision you make in San Joaquin. The people who are its members, however, will suffer in the midst of this conflict, and probably suffer unnecessarily. Jesus calls us to take up our crosses daily, but not in the service of division and antagonism. He calls us to take up our crosses in his service of reconciling the world to God. Would that you might lead the people of San Joaquin toward decisions that build up the Body, that bring abundant life to those within and beyond our Church, that restore us to oneness.
I stand ready for conversation and reconciliation. May God bless your deliberation.
I remain
Your servant in Christ,
+Katharine
The Most Rev. Katharine Jefferts Schori
Presiding Bishop and Primate

[gtsecc]

My prediction:
http://www.epiphanynassau.org/images/diocese1.gif
His Grace, The Most Rev'd Drexel Wellington Gomez
Lord Archbishop, Metropolitan and Primate
of the Church of the West Indies &
Bishop of the Diocese Of Nassau & The Bahamas

Will be the new PB for groups leaving ECUSA.

[longhair75]

I extend to those who wish to leave our Communion my hope of safe passage and the blessings of God on their journey.

[gtsecc]

Leaving ECUSA, but not the Anglican Communion.

[longhair75]

friend gtsecc,

My abject apologies if my sentiments were not expressed in a precise enough fashion for you.

[gtsecc]

friend gtsecc,

My abject apologies if my sentiments were not expressed in a precise enough fashion for you.
Oh good Lord, you don't have to be that way about it. :doh:
Did you not think it was an important point to make?
I certainly think that, as Anglicans, being in or out of TEC or the AC is certainly a point worth being clear about. Besides political, social, an economic ramifications, it has huge theological consequences.

[longhair75]

friend gtsecc

My assumption is that those that are leaving are not in favor of continuing to share a common communion with those of us who remain.

[Wigglesworth]

It's an important point to make, because one group may finally be recognized by somebody to be maintaining the integrity of the church.

Then again, they may not.

:crossrc:

[gtsecc]

friend gtsecc

My assumption is that those that are leaving are not in favor of continuing to share a common communion with those of us who remain.
Not really.
In over simplified terms, those leaving TEC remain sacramentally, but are removed pastorally.

By virtue of being in the AC, they are in Communion with TEC.
By having a different PB, they have different pastoral oversight than TEC.

[longhair75]

friend gtsecc,

from O.P: “We now have two separate religions in the Episcopal Church,” Schofield said. “The Episcopal Church has become an apostate to the point of heresy.”

This does not sound as if:Not really.
In over simplified terms, those leaving TEC remain sacramentally, but are removed pastorally.

By virtue of being in the AC, they are in Communion with TEC.
By having a different PB, they have different pastoral oversight than TEC.
is the case. Bishop Schofield's statement leads me to think, at least on the surface, that he has no interest in remaining in communion with the ECUSA.

That being said, I still hope that my brothers and sisters leaving in search of what they consider to be more appropriate pastoral oversight find fulfillment.

[gtsecc]

But to break communion with ECUSA, you really have to leave the entire AC.

[longhair75]

But to break communion with ECUSA, you really have to leave the entire AC.

So, how do Bishop Schofiled and his followers resolve this issue? If one believes that the ECUSA has in fact "become apostate to the point of heresy," how does one continue to share a Communion?

[gtsecc]

So, how do Bishop Schofiled and his followers resolve this issue? If one believes that the ECUSA has in fact "become apostate to the point of heresy," how does one continue to share a Communion?
See post #13

[RedneckAnglican]

you know...one of the big problems I had with TC-L is that I never seemed to be Lutheran enough...now I see that I am now not considered Anglican enough...I really love this stuff...

I just hope Jesus considers me Christian enough or I'm just done for....

praying for all of us...WHICHEVER side of the fence your on...

[higgs2]

you know...one of the big problems I had with TC-L is that I never seemed to be Lutheran enough...now I see that I am now not considered Anglican enough...I really love this stuff...

I just hope Jesus considers me Christian enough or I'm just done for....

praying for all of us...WHICHEVER side of the fence your on...

I have no idea what you're talking about.

[longhair75]

Friend gtsecc,

I read post #13, carefully considered it, and even quoted it in post #14. Re-reading it does not seem to answer my question from post #16.

[Tetzel]

you know...one of the big problems I had with TC-L is that I never seemed to be Lutheran enough...now I see that I am now not considered Anglican enough...I really love this stuff...

I just hope Jesus considers me Christian enough or I'm just done for....

praying for all of us...WHICHEVER side of the fence your on...

Barely anyone is Lutheran enough for some of the TC-Lers, don't let that shake you. Besides, it's usually those who moan the most about people not being adequately Lutheran who show up a bit later as "Orthodox"

[gtsecc]

So, how do Bishop Schofiled and his followers resolve this issue? If one believes that the ECUSA has in fact "become apostate to the point of heresy," how does one continue to share a Communion?
Well, consider his choices:
1. Rome
2. Constantinople
3. Canterbury, but with a different primatial oversight

3 is still problematic, but still better than 1 and 2

The national church has forced him to make some hard decisions based on his understanding of the faith.

[Torah613]

This whole thing smacks of a violation of the traditional catholic order. Somewhat akin to what Msgr. Lefebre did.

If someone is in heresy, it is required of all non-heretical bishops to break communion with him/her. However, I would point out that no-one has apropriately leveled the charge of heresy through the proper chanels.

With all that being said, I wish those leaving the communion of our church peace and safe passage. I also wish that they find what they are looking for, and peace in Christ.

Joe Zollars

[gtsecc]

Can we keep the property and retirement fund?

[Torah613]

I'm going to leave the neighborhood and sue to get my neighbors house and pension because he played his music too loudly for me.

[Aymn27]

I'm going to leave the neighborhood and sue to get my neighbors house and pension because he played his music too loudly for me.
Joe, this is not a matter of neighbors - but of family divorce - liberals don't "own" the property any more than those leaving - they just compromise a larger percentage of the church because conservatives have been evacuating for years.

I think ultimately it should be decided upon who is the "Anglican" Church within the US - who will have affiliation with the Anglican Communion - because that is what those who have given before and worked for the church in the past dedicated their time and talent for....

[Torah613]

technically legally they are owned by the national Church, and always have been. Those who are leaving are simply departing guests.

Joe Zollars

[Torah613]

whether or not another church is recognized as the "anglican" church in the US or not, really doesn't matter as TEC owns the property and the pensions. The Law's on our side.

Joe Zollars

[Aymn27]

technically legally they are owned by the national Church, and always have been. Those who are leaving are simply departing guests.

Joe Zollars
As I understand it, that will be decided on a state by state basis - each state having different laws concerning such....California has thus far ruled in favor of the departing parishes...elsewhere it has not been the same..

I don't encourage anyone to fight over brick and mortar - I say come out of Babylon - eventually she will fall and an opportunity to purchase the property will come up - b/c let's face it - liberalism is a passe' theology in every denomination...

[gtsecc]

technically legally they are owned by the national Church, and always have been. Those who are leaving are simply departing guests.

Joe Zollars
Ecclesially, the Diocese owns the property.
If a parish leaves, church law states that the property is owned by the diocese. This will likely also set the precedent, here to for unknown, for property rights beween the national church and the dioceses.

[Torah613]

ah my apologies. I stand corrected.

Joe Zollars

[RadixLecti]

Why do we really need the buildings? I realize that they are beautiful parts of our Christian heritage, but they are just trappings. When the AMiA was first formed one of the statements I remember reading was "you keep the buildings, we'll keep the faith." I'd love to have them, but in the big scheme of things they don't really matter.