Thursday, January 18, 2007

URGENT BREAKING NEWS

A News Release from the Communications Office of The Diocese of Virginia

Diocesan Leadership Declares Church Property ‘Abandoned’

For release: Thursday, January 18, 2007

Contact: Patrick Getlein 1-800 346-2373 x 30

Today, January 18, 2007, the Executive Board of the Diocese of Virginia took a step forward in preserving the mission and ministry of the Diocese and the Episcopal Church for current and future generations of Episcopalians and adopted a resolution concerning the property of 11 Episcopal Churches where a majority of members – including the vestry and clergy – have left The Episcopal Church but have not relinquished Church property and have continued to occupy the churches and use the property owned by the Diocese.

Specifically, the Executive Board declared the property of those churches – real and personal – to be abandoned in accordance with the Canons of the Diocese.

“All real and personal property held by or for the benefit of any Church or Mission within this Diocese is held in trust for The Episcopal Church and the Diocese of Virginia.” (Canon 15.1)

“No part of the real property of a Church, except abandoned property, shall be alienated, sold, exchanged, encumbered or otherwise transferred for any purpose without the consent of the congregation … [and] the Bishop, acting with the advice and consent of the Standing Committee of the Diocese.” (Canon 15.2)

Having declared the property abandoned for the purposes for which it is set aside, namely the mission of the Episcopal Church and the Diocese of Virginia, the Executive Board is required to protect the property, according to the Canons:

“[W]henever any property, real or personal, formerly owned or used by any congregation of the Episcopal Church in the Diocese of Virginia for any purpose for which religious congregations are authorized to hold property under the provisions of the Code of Virginia or any amendment thereof, has ceased to be so occupied or used by such congregation, so that the same may be regarded as abandoned property by the Executive Board, which shall have the authority to declare such property abandoned and shall have the authority to take charge and custody thereof, the Executive Board shall take such steps as may be necessary to transfer the property to the Bishop…” (Canon 15.3)

The unanimous decision by the Executive Board also authorizes the Bishop to take such steps as may be necessary to recover or secure such real and personal property.

In addition, the Standing Committee met today for its regular monthly meeting and took up the issue of the status of the clergy attached to these congregations. Following today’s meeting the Standing Committee will communicate its determination to the Bishop according to the Canons.

The 11 churches where property has been declared abandoned are:

Church of the Redeemer, Chantilly

Church of the Apostles, Fairfax

Church of the Epiphany, Herndon

Church of Our Saviour, Oatlands

Church of the Word, Gainesville

Potomac Falls Church, Sterling

St. Margaret’s, Woodbridge

St. Paul’s, Haymarket

St. Stephen’s, Heathsville

Truro, Fairfax

The Falls Church, Falls Church



###



A Letter to the Diocese of Virginia from the Rt. Rev. Peter James Lee, Bishop

January 18, 2007

Dear Friends:

Today, the leadership of the Diocese of Virginia, supported by the prayers of faithful Episcopalians in this Diocese and around the world, took action to preserve the sacred mission entrusted to us by previous generations for the future of the Church here in Virginia and across the Episcopal Church.

At the heart of our faith, is the reliability of the promises of God to God’s people. Nowhere is that reliability more clearly affirmed than in the promises of God that his exiled people will be returned to Jerusalem, to their spiritual home. (Jer. 36)

Because we believe that God’s promises to his people continue to be reliable, we will seek the return of the churches of the Diocese of Virginia that are occupied by dissidents.

We are commanded by scripture to obey the civil authority. (Rom. 13) While St. Paul admonishes individual Christians to avoid lawsuits with one another, obedience to the rule of law is a more controlling teaching. We believe the law supports diocesan ownership of church property.

In some of our congregations, members led by their lay and ordained leadership, have voted to leave The Episcopal Church and to affiliate with a non-recognized organization of churches purportedly under the authority of Nigerian Archbishop Peter Akinola. The organization is known as CANA, or Convocation of Anglicans in North America.

The Church of Nigeria, like The Episcopal Church, is an autonomous province of the Anglican Communion with clearly defined boundaries. Bonds of affection in the Anglican Communion hold that provincial boundaries are not crossed by bishops without expressed invitation. Bishop Akinola’s effort to establish CANA within the boundaries of The Episcopal Church has occurred without any invitation or authorization whatsoever and violates centuries of established Anglican heritage. As the Archbishop of Canterbury has made clear, CANA is not a branch of the Anglican Communion and does not have his encouragement.

When the membership of these congregations voted to sever their ties with the Episcopal Church and affiliate with CANA, they left remaining Episcopal congregations in those places without vestries, without clergy and without their churches, whether the remaining congregations numbered one or 100 souls. The spiritual abandonment of their Episcopal brothers and sisters of the past, the present and the future, is perhaps the greatest offense for which there is no redress under our tradition.

In the structure of the Episcopal Church, individuals may come and go but parishes continue. And in some of these churches there is life springing from these dry bones. At St. Stephen’s in Heathsville, the remaining Episcopal congregation, a full third of the congregation before the vote to leave, has held a congregational meeting, elected a vestry, elected a delegate to Council and currently is worshiping at a nearby United Methodist Church until they can be reunited with their Episcopal Church property. In Woodbridge, a growing congregation of 50 Episcopalians of St. Margaret’s Church will hold their congregational meeting this Sunday, elect a vestry, confirm their previously elected delegate to Council and will continue to worship at a nearby location until they, too, can reenter their Episcopal church. Similar groups are organizing at The Falls Church, and there are nearly 100 people at the Church of the Epiphany in Herndon who may reorganize and continue as the Episcopal Church in that place.

It is for these persons that previous generations of Episcopalians worshiped, worked, prayed and gave generously for the spread of the Kingdom of God. It is the trust that they created, and that we inherited, which now we must move to protect, preserve and expand for generations to come.

For years diocesan leadership has worked to accommodate the views of the leadership of these churches. We have resisted attempts to deny them seat, voice and vote at the Annual Council when they stopped funding the budget of the Diocese. They have enjoyed access to our diocesan-managed medical and dental benefits. They have enjoyed other diocesan resources like grant funding for church planting, mission work and congregational development, Shrine Mont and Roslyn. I have met dozens of times with the leadership of these churches and with their counsel in an effort to find common ground on matters of theology. Three times I invited the retired Archbishop of Canterbury Lord Carey to conduct confirmations and receptions when my episcopal presence was either specifically refused or would have been a source of tension for the membership. I endured being told that the parents of confirmands would not want me to lay hands on their children at confirmation and I have received other personal attacks including death wishes in letters, reports and public statements.

I have tried to find a way forward in our dispute over property that would keep us from having to resort to civil courts. No longer am I convinced that such an outcome is possible, nor do I believe that such a move at this time is dishonorable. Rather, I believe as does the leadership of our Diocese and of our Church, that the actions taken to secure our property are consistent with our mission and with our fiduciary and moral obligations to the Church of our ancestors, to the church we serve today, and to the church of those who will follow us.

The votes to separate from The Episcopal Church negated all the work we had done in good faith over the years to accommodate the views of the leadership of these churches and focused our attention on the only two remaining factors: the status of clergy and the status of property. The work of the Property Commission, which assembled immediately after the votes to separate, brought together the years of efforts at accommodation and the previous year of discussion over matters of property and clergy status. As that work was brought into the Property Commission’s view and shared with the Executive Board, Standing Committee and with counsel for the separated churches, it became clear that no position other than relinquishing our claim to Episcopal Church property would be satisfactory to those who have left. There would be no serious effort at reaching a fair market price for property. There would be no discussion of the issues on a case by case basis. There was repeated desire to wrap issues of clergy status, including matters having to do with clergy pensions, into the discussion of church property, an inappropriate bundling of unrelated issues. It became clear that the process of negotiation would be unduly cumbersome and would risk further a second alienation of those loyal Episcopalians who had already been disenfranchised by the vote of the majority of their former members.

Recently, attorneys for the dissidents sent a letter threatening action against me and any other diocesan officials who “set foot on” or “trespass” on Episcopal Church property. By contrast, your leadership has not moved to change locks or freeze assets. Rather, once again, we have moved to accommodate these dissidents at the expense of our faithful people.

Following the votes of the majority of members of these congregations, the counsel of these now non-Episcopal congregations filed reports with the clerks of the courts in their jurisdictions under a statute in the Code of Virginia that they think gives them the right to Episcopal Church property. We have intervened in that action. We are supported in this by The Episcopal Church on a national level. It is with a heavy heart that your leadership has moved in this direction, but it is not without a long period of efforts at accommodation and negotiation.

These differences are not about property but about the legacy we have received for the mission of Christ and our obligation to preserve that legacy for the future.

In the coming days and months there will be many opinions aired in the media, in letters and in countless blogs, opinions disguised as facts. I urge you to turn away from those as the distracting noise of the world intended to take your mind and your heart off the mission of the Church. Instead, I urge you to pray for our brothers and sisters who have moved to separate themselves from us. I urge us to remember that in their call away from the Episcopal Church, they may be responding to a genuine call to new ministry in a different place and in a different way. The Episcopal Church and the Diocese of Virginia will mourn their loss. We will suffer from their absence in ways we cannot know at this time in our life. I believe that they, too, will know times when our absence from their life will be a source of great sorrow for them.

My dear brothers and sisters, the Church in these communities may look different moving forward. We will look different as a Diocese. And the road ahead will be long and filled with opportunities to lose heart. We must always have our eyes fixed on God, not be anxious, and trust in the reliability of God’s promises. For even in this, God is doing a new thing.

Faithfully,

Peter James Lee

44 comments:

Karen B. said...

BB and all my beloved Truro friends and family,

Praying for you!! There's a reason Ps. 37 is in today's lectionary! Go read it. And the prayer I wrote on Lent & Beyond this morning is relevant too.

http://lent.classicalanglican.net/?p=3036

With love and deep anguish,
Karen

Anonymous said...

I think of the Episcopal Church as sitting on a major earthquake fault, with pressure building and being released in one diocese after another. Until your diocese is sitting on the part of the fault that becomes active, you cannot begin to understand the level of stress that becomes part of your daily life. Pray for these churches. Pray that Bishop Lee will have a change of heart.

Uncle Dino (Now a Grandpa) said...

Mr. Lee is NOT a victim, no matter how many times he spins the Virginia situation. He made his decisions - bad ones - and must now live with the consequences.

I and my Truro family will not be bullied! I will, however, continue to pray for Mr. Lee and the Diocese.

Phil said...

Oh, no, a move at this time wouldn't be "dishonorable." Perish the thought that the good bishop could be thought so. He protests too much, methinks.

Kevin said...

Okay, in case you didn't know this is supposed to be the first day in The Week of Prayer for Christian Unity. Now does these actions fit with that? I know +Lee is big on unity, therefore he is going to sue us.

[*Sigh*]

I'm not surprised, I expected it.

He's going to have fun naming everyone in a law suite or he might just claim a lean on all eleven & fight one by one. In any case it is sad.

Just a reminder, if +Lee really valued us as much as he said in today's release, he should have abstained in those controversial votes at GC03.

Alan said...

I am well aware that the two flagship parishes have financial and political resources which are going to make the folks at 815 feel like they walked into a buzz saw. Truro and The Falls Church will of course carry the bulk of the load. However, I am wondering if there is any sort of legal fund for the smaller parishes?

Allen Lewis said...

Alan said: However, I am wondering if there is any sort of legal fund for the smaller parishes?

StandFirm
has a post up discussing this very thing. The American Anglican Council is managing such a fund. See the post on StandFirm regarding legal defense

Chris said...

This is a sad day, indeed.

I'm at a loss for how the reliability of God's promises is a clarion call for legal action against other Christians.

Its also interesting that Bishop Lee goes into great detail about his actions to hold unity but does not give any insight into why settlements outside court would not be possible. I think more background on what led him to this position would have been helpful - or at least insightful.

Pray that Shalom will truly come about in this situation.

Judith L said...

Sorry. I did not mean to be "anonymous". You and all of the churches are in my prayers.

Anonymous said...

My prayers are with you and the faithful BB.

As for me I will recall those most eloquent words of General Anthony McAuliffe, "To the German Commander, Nuts!"

Now praise the lord and pass the ammo!

A.G.
St David of Wales Church
Denton, TX
Diocese of Dallas

Faith said...

We're called dissidents three times.
That's okay with me. Some of my best friends are or were dissidents:
Christian dissidents in the Soviet Union; Political and religious dissidents in China; the whole SPLA was called a bunch of dissidents, when they weren't called something worse by the moral equivalency crowd.

Happy to be a dissident.

Pat Kashtock said...

A friend of mine at St. Margaret's always said Lee speaks out of both sides of his mouth. I did not want to believe that of anyone, including him 15 years ago. But I can see from this letter that he is duplicitous. Yuck -- it is too nauseating to even get all the way through. I feel slimed. Is Bishop Jones in on all of this, too?

Anonymous said...

Let the bishop try and take the Church - the property of CHRIST!

He can be sure that unlike in CT these churches are defended with prayer and the blood of Christ, and with rather more than just prayer

I hope and pray the bishop does come in person to seize this property that way he shall do down to his father below much sooner than he is planning for it

ECUSA and this bishop have committed the unforgiveable blasphemy: I pray that runination will be visited on them in this life and damnation in the next!

BabyBlue said...

We do need to be careful that our own hearts do not grow cold.

bb

Kevin said...

Preach it sister!

I know that's not very Episcopalian of me, but we do need to remember the Lord is no respector of persons, the only way to have God on our side is to be on God's side. He fights His battle a little odd compared to us. Yet by guarding our hearts, through this trial we may know the Lord we serve even more.

I'm still struggling with that "counting is all joy" though.

Eddo said...

Gee whiz, anon, do you really pray "that runination (sic) will be visited on them in this life and damnation in the next!"? Is that a prayer from your new so-called Christian Anglican church prayer book? Do you mean to threaten physical harm (I trust we can leave the eternal harm to God himself, but I'm not so sure) to the bishop with "that way he shall do (sic) down...much sooner than he is planning for it," and with "...defended...with rather more than just prayer."? What, is Akinola sending arms?

And Kevin, just how do the actions of the break-away parishes fit into your idea of Christian Unity? Or is that the answer, it's your idea of Christian unity that matters.

Kevin said...

Eddo:

We voted to leave hersey for unity with the Body of Christ as a whole. The Roman Catholic Church expressed it's views with +++Williams last November, they actually match our views of the theological understanding of these matter. Also last November the Russian Orthodox, who broke communion with ECUSA after GC03, said they were in communion with those who hold to the faith as once recieved [Link Here]. Our views also hold true with the largest Protestant group in the USA.

Christian Unity, +Lee spouts it, but he is on a ship that's drifting farther and farther form the bulk of the Church. We go into a small boat and rowing as fast as we can toward the rest of Believers.

I guess from +Lee's prespective we are leaving, the sad thing is TEC is the one leaving. They can't even affirm Jesus is the only way to the Father any more thus negating the Cross. Hard to be a Christian without Christ.

Unity is a popular buzz word. Unity with whom? A radical, fast become religous sect, maybe in ten years down to cult status, or the Cloud of Witnesses that is watching us run our race?

Byron said...

Just a moderate Episcopalian visitor to your site and rather shocked at some of the statements, particularly anonymous and Kevin. Anonymous would apparently have +Lee of TEC go to hell, and Kevin is convinced that somehow TEC is no longer even a liberal Christian church but what, pagan I guess? Sounds pretty extreme indeed. I know that there is likely a more middle-of-the-road majority at these break-away churches in Virginia, but it would be hard to tell from these posts. I would suggest that churches no longer Episcopalian should pay for the properties held in their trust by their former denomination, at least something given the great wealth exhibited by several of these parishes. TEC could use the $$ toward the Millenium Development Goals where it could make a real difference.

Anonymous said...

I, too, am shocked at some of the statements that I'm reading; they have also affirmed my decision to stick with TEC, warts and all, and work to make an effective change within the church.

However, I'm encouraged by the fact that the WP has cited remnant congregations that are in prayer and awaiting the day that they can return to their buildings.

Face it people, you made a choice. Ask Akinola, your bishop, for help. Better yet, why not just become Roman Catholic and get it over with?

Kevin said...

I'll bite with the presumption that Byron & Anon are just entering the blogosphere and not following all that has happened.

The move away from the mooring happen more than 30 years ago. Many people have done documentation of when or where (from being told not to do something then doing it anyways to outright disregard of "faith once received."

The actions of the GC03 all focus on the bishop of NH. Less attention is given to the rejection of B002, the affirmation of Scripture. One of the quotes from then was "we wrote the Bible we can rewrite it."

The crack became a chasm. Fast forward to recent history. You now have a PB that has begun to reject the basics of the Christian faith [In her own words then the secular media gets it then there just the troubling "Reclaiming fiasco." at the official Episcopal Church bookstore]. At some point there is a line.

So Byron, where is that line crossed for you? I can't answer that for I have no clue what your situation might be in terms of so many variables. I'll say you are correct, Jesus is no longer the way but a way, there seems not to be an understanding of what it means to be a Christian. Often I think TEC is starting to draw it's theology from The Essence of Christianity by Ludwig Feuerbach.

The watchmen have blown the horn, that's all they're supposed to do. The decisions are up to the individual and the parishes for the national church is moving away from the rest of the Body of Christian singing that the Lord is doing a new thing.

Anonymous said...

So go, already. You have made your stand, and TEC has made theirs. But realize that you are on your own, and once again, make appeals to your great Leader, Akinola, and found your own church and church buildings. All I have seen is a fight over money and power, more so than religion. I have read of an Archbishop who proclaims gay men and lesbians as people who do not have a right to speak, meet, or gather in public places. I have read a web site (stand firm) where commenters have wished Bishop Lee goes to hell when he dies. This is who you want to ally with? I believe that you people have allied yourselves with forces who cannot be trusted and have become pawns in a political battle you cannot even begin to understand.

And, as a ex-Catholic and now an Episcopalian, I can say with great knowledge that the Church of Rome welcomes you--where legalism, hierarchy, and dogma reigns. I prefer the road of scripture, tradition, and REASON.

Enjoy the road that you have chosen.

Kevin said...

I must have missed that comment on Stand Firm. What I read over there is some liberal priest taking on the good Dr. Witt and not doing so well. Man is it great theology, each argument and it's rebuttal.

RE: "you are on your own, and once again, make appeals to your great Leader, Akinola,"

No, that's worse theology. We should not appeal to ++Akinola, there is One certainly greater.

RE:"And, as a ex-Catholic "

Then you should be aware that when heresy is found that the RC cannons say that not only should they leave but it's the duty to find a godly bishop. +Lee has been fair but his votes at GC03 and more ++KJS interviews show this more and more (see"her own words" link above ).

RE:"I prefer the road of scripture, tradition, and REASON."

Actually so do I, which is one reason I'm loving some of the banter on Stand Firm.

RE:"Enjoy the road that you have chosen."

You the same, my friend, may you find joy in the journey.

BabyBlue said...

I am not "leaving" - it is the Episcopal Church that continues to make decisions that widen the gulf between TEC and the Anglican Communion. Why would TEC not be welcome in the ACC right now - because of the unilateral decisions it keeps making with little regard as to how those decisions impact other parts of the Anglican Communion.

Bishop Lee is not a victim - those who are being persecuted in the Sudan are victims, but he is not. He lives a very very comfortable lifestyle. He was always welcome to come to Truro - it was his decision not to come. In fact, we invited him yet again to participate during the 40 Days of Discernment and he sent a video of himself instead. That was his choice, not ours.

You can see the difference in the letter exchange between Bishop Lee and Bishop Minns in the posting above.

It was not always this way - I remember the pastoral-side of Bishop Lee in the early 90s. But something happened, I don't know what - and he changed. Maybe it was when Suffragan Bishop Clay Matthews left the diocese. Things were never the same after that.

bb

Kevin said...

Anon:

I did a CTRL+F on the comment, yes there is one of which you speak. Most references are to the Gospel message and one stating TEC is setting up a broad road the leads to hell. Yes the one comment as out of line.

I've seen many like them recently, these topics are very emotional. The Fr. Tom Woodward & Dr. William Witt debate is much more worth noting as both men are articulating the positions, thus the "REASON" element you value.

Yes you are correct, there's one comment not proper at all. I'll confess that, but do read all the others as well, for it does get to the heart of the argument.

BabyBlue said...

FYI Friends,

I view the recent comments here as reflecting Kübler-Ross' Five Stages of Grief:

The stages are:
Denial - The "This can't be real" stage.: "This is not happening to me. There must be a mistake."
Anger - The "Why me?" stage.: "How dare you do this to me?!" (either referring to God, the departed, or oneself)
Bargaining - The "If I do this, you’ll do that" stage.: "Just let me live to see my son graduate."
Depression - The "Defeated" stage.: "I can't bear to face going through this, putting my family through this."
Acceptance - The "This is going to happen" stage.: "I'm ready, I don't want to struggle anymore."

I see all these stages at work (even within myself!) here at the BabyBlueCafe. Since the vision is that this is a place to hang-out, I don't have a problem with people voicing their feelings and would recommend that others understand as well that people may be in one of these stages (either knowing it or not knowing it). I also have found that these five stages can start again because we are not always aware of what we are grieving. I certainly felt this way myself this week when I read the word "abandoned" in Bishop Lee's press release and statement - it hit a very deep place (Bishop Lee has been my bishop for over twenty years now). In fact, I read that word and felt "denial" - that I couldn't believe it was happening.

So just a word for those here if you happen to pass by - I may actually do a more in-depth posting on this topic soon as a way to frame what is happening to us, whatever side of the spectrum we find ourselves.

bb

Anonymous said...

Kevin:

A "godly bishop" would be one that advocates taking away the human rights of others? Read your own words. Sorry, I'd rather stick with TEC than align myself with someone who believes in denying people (gays and lesbians do happen to be people, BTW) the right to meet, assemble, and be in public.

Oh, and NICE comment from one of your compadres here about the PB looking like a witch. That's real Christian charity for you.

BabyBlue said...

We appreciate, anon, that you want to remain Episcopalian. Let's keep the mudslinging to the sandbox.

If this keeps up, I'll have to post another Monty Python video.

bb

Anonymous said...

Who is mudslinging? I'm not the person who said that the PB looked like the White Witch from the Chronicles of Narnia. What I am saying is that by aligning yourselves with the Church of Nigeria, your "diocese" may be walking into a world of trouble.

Is the Nigerian Church going to accept women's ordination? How will it deal with culture clashes? If indeed, you keep your buildings, will they become property of the Nigerian Church? So many unanswered questions that should have been nailed down before the move was made, IMHO. Please enlighten me.

Just asking.

And I love Monty Python. So have at it.

Anonymous said...

BTW, if you want to read about legal precedent, google the words cherry ame zion to read about another breakaway faction's fight to keep their buildings.

Anonymous said...

I have to say that ordaining a gay bishop is quite a coup, but it certainly flushed out the radical element among th Episcopals. I support Peter Lee in keeping the church out of the hands of the fundemental radicals, ie. Truro's rebels; however, I would strongly advise removing an openly gay bishop and all gay/lesbian priests. Now is the time for compromise.

Kevin said...

RE:Oh, and NICE comment from one of your compadres here about the PB looking like a witch. That's real Christian charity for you.

I'd say sorceress. If you're going to dress up in an outfit like the sorcerer in Fantasia ... ah ... er ... it does go against Scripture, but certain against tradition, probably *REASON*

My comment is in jest, because it was a very outlandish outfit. BTW I do read revisionist blogs as well and can match you comment for comment of uncharitable comments. So you 'win' no prize there. Sad truth is there is a family break up, no matter how you color it. It's painful, at least I hope it's painful. People often speak forgetting Matt 5:43-48.

I confess in another situation, I'm finding those verses very hard to live out. The person keeps provoking me, lots of encouragement and I blow it often. So I'm not surprised when people blow it, thank you for pointing this stuff out, my lack of surprise does not lower the standard.

RE: If indeed, you keep your buildings, will they become property of the Nigerian Church?

No, that was one of the criteria of search. CANA & I believe AMiA both local ownership, as it was in PECUSA.

RE:"And I love Monty Python. So have at it."

Always good to have some common ground.

Peace be with you this week Anon!

Kevin

Kevin said...

RE"I have to say that ordaining a gay bishop is quite a coup"

I must confess, that while your last part of the comment would throw everything into disarray, it is sad that it's about this specific of sexuality. I'm much more of a purest in that I have a real problem with divorced & remarried clergy. We compromised so long ago, trust my Anon, I've held +Minns to account on this and BB should have me on audio file holding +Nazir-Ali to account for heterosexual sin. I want the whole of the Bible, including the parts that cover me. It's too easy to say what's good for another, but I want what's good for me. Sad to say the only reason we're discussing homosexuality is due to the lack of discussion of heterosexual sins.

May the Lord have mercy on us all and call us to His love and purity.

Kevin said...

Anon:

Is this Mike who I've banter with before? Guessing because he was also former Catholic. If so, I do want to apologize for coming off patronizing, it wasn't my intent(I was excited to make a connection, but understand due to our banter prior, if so I did want to apologize when you might read it.

Anonymous said...

Find your center. This Nation cannot afford another half-cocked, schism and more fast food style churches. The Episcopals will retain their land, and those who don't wish to dissolve into the vast diaspora of Christian factions must soften their stances and re-enter talks. The radical element such as Oakes and crew must move to a nice Baptist Church in Fairfax. I'm sure the fervor of this brand of fire and brimstone would better suit their needs. I repeat the gay bishop must go too.

Kevin said...

RE:"The radical element such as Oakes and crew"


*LOL* Oh you do need to get out more! Jim Oaks as radical. They did build that new skate ramp at Van Dyke park, but I'm so sorry that image of Jim Oaks just doesn't do it for me. Thank anyways, I needed the laugh!

Anonymous said...

If only Jim Oakes found time for radical skateboarding, then maybe Truro and crew would be a happier place. Redirecting the church has been an obsession on his for a long time. I get your gnarley humor, but trust when I say "radical" in reference to Jim Oakes, I mean strict Calvinist. I am referring to the Radical Right. The Episcopal Church can hardly afford this brand of extremism as they cannot afford gay clergy either.

Kevin said...

RE: I mean strict Calvinist


Oh heavens not a Calvinist! You better read up on your 39 Articles, especially #17, they sound pretty Calvinistic to me.

Boy, Anon your funny. Be nice or we might make you diagram that sentence in Article 17.

This Anon must not be the same as the other anon, our debate skills have decreased to ad hominem.

Anonymous said...

Please feel free to make all the diagrams to wish. My favorite will be the very "logical" exodus if Truro property by your beloved splitters.

Kevin said...

Yeapers, this Anon is not the same as the other Anon, this one needs CA.

This one moved into the anger stage. May the Lord help you walk through this towards His purposes for your life.

Kevin said...

Anon #1 is probably laughing and Anon #2 will probably not get the joke and we'll hear something about property and GLBT clergy (a true centrist - try to get everyone upset?), I know I shouldn't feed them, but at this point it's kind of fun.

Anonymous said...

You amuse yourself. This is the kind of jester mentality the hardliners have enjoyed while they destroy TEC. I hope you are equally jovial when the properties are preserved and the splitters find another home to infect. The center is a bad place I know because you get mowed down on both sides; however, the center is the voice of reason. All others: THE VOICES OF RADICALISM (and not surfing or skateboarding my little jester).

Kevin said...

*LOL* Right on cue Anon #2

Anonymous said...

Kevin:

This is anon #1.

If you want purity, particularly in matters of heterosexuality, again I say: The Roman Catholic church is ready, willing and open to having you join. Because the floodgates have been opened, I doubt there is no way that the Church of Nigeria is going to be the "pure church" that you desire; at least in Roman Catholicism, there is celibacy, so there's no question.

Frankly, I see this your movement splintering off internally even further over issues such as these that haven't been worked out.

Take care.

Anon #1

Kevin said...

Hello Anon #1

RE: RCC

Oh yeah, they're quite ready. I have a deep respect for the RC, I'm familar with both their doctrine as may be taught in class also as understood by Catholics. I *KNOW* I'm a Protestant.

I'd not want to make an over-generalization because the RCC is so large that's it's true somewhere, but I've personally found more openness to talk about the struggle part of purity, such as pornography, in Protestant circles. Don't get me wrong there a lot of works-based theology even in places like TFC & Truro, where looking good in front of others is important, but I've also found real people who strive, fail at some stuff and struggle. My personal experience of the RCC is they set the standards but lacking in the help with the struggles (I find self-condemning - but plenty of Protestants follow that course as well).

RE: Frankly, I see this your movement splintering off internally even further over issues such as these that haven't been worked out.

Oh you did hit the weak spot! Yes, you are correct. The Battle of Dunkirk or running out of a burning building is the analogy. However history, especially the history of the English Reformation does warn of the splintering. +Lyons only wants this to be temporary and looking for a new structure in the US & Cananda. There is hope with the REC (1873) working with APA & CANA that this could have a reuniting effect, instead of fissiparous one of endless splits as were pron to do. So there is hope with the Common Cause partnership to bring in many who are outside now.

Today in the DC area you have FIFNA, AMiA & Bolivia in DC, REC & Uganda in VA. So currently already complex before you add CANA.


Let's fact it, human beings are in the loop. Along with thrologians, probably some pyschologist & sociologist might be wise to bring to the table. Using CANA & REC because of their common accord document (cordial relationship between structures). You'll have one REC bishop who graduated RES or Cranmer House, been in pastorial ministry tin REC, now a bishop and +Minns who a bishop for five months and from VTS & ECUSA. Logically there could be tensions in those relationships between two men. Then you have AMiA with some old tensions that linger or other Common Cause people, human ego is enough trouble but add Satan stirring the mix, oh boy.

If God's involved this might surprise everyone, if purely up to humans, I fear you are correct.

So if this works in ten years time, know it must of been Divine & was not us!