tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post2361057795988658830..comments2024-03-27T08:46:54.369-04:00Comments on BabyBlueOnline: The $64 million dollar question?Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17490745238430648958noreply@blogger.comBlogger45125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post-60503744022286748062010-09-26T14:18:09.915-04:002010-09-26T14:18:09.915-04:00Oops. That last (8:55am) was from
bookguybaltmdOops. That last (8:55am) was from <br />bookguybaltmdAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post-70825902572110971012010-09-26T08:55:04.103-04:002010-09-26T08:55:04.103-04:00It seems to be pretty public. They've had hea...It seems to be pretty public. They've had hearings at GC, they post the budget on-line, and they discuss it pretty openly. It IS true that those numbers change as costs are accounted for, but that doesn't obviate the fact that the discussion IS public (as it their general lack of knowledge in advance of exactly what the cost is going to be).<br /><br />On the other hand, the departing folks have not disclosed ANYTHING at all about their finances. Isn't it two way street? Shouldn't ACNA and CANA disclose the sources of their funding AT LEAST as much as TEC has already before we start making these wild, unfounded, and 'trial-by-internet' allegations against TEC?<br /><br />Isn't fairness something you consider here?<br /><br />I will admit to being a little tired of these wild accusations that are not backed up by either facts OR by equal disclosure.<br /><br />Frankly, the two-facedness on this subject (TEC needs to disclose ALL, but we won't disclose anything) completely and totally discredit's your position. <br /><br />TEC has disclosed to members of the church (AND to their auditing committees) all that they think is appropriate and a good bit more than is either required or has been disclosed by the other side.<br /><br />If you've got something and you've got standing, pony up. Otherwise, it's none of your business.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post-581699778282598792010-09-25T17:56:53.927-04:002010-09-25T17:56:53.927-04:00Actually, Bookguy - TEC isn't being forthcomin...Actually, Bookguy - TEC isn't being forthcoming on the figures. If they are, how about sharing it with the rest of us.Closing Downhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00424188419413426448noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post-63269820309648354732010-09-24T16:22:58.498-04:002010-09-24T16:22:58.498-04:00So much for the motion for re-hearing in the VA ca...So much for the motion for re-hearing in the VA case.... Back to the lower court....<br /><br />http://www.thediocese.net/Customer-Content/WWW/CMS/files/property_rehearing_decision92410.pdf<br /><br />bookguybaltmdAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post-13624450562490745782010-09-24T09:29:24.840-04:002010-09-24T09:29:24.840-04:00@ BB - Be fair here, which side is politicizing?
...@ BB - Be fair here, which side is politicizing?<br /><br />Is it SOME (usually but not allways liberal and urban) elements of the national church who want to at least BEGIN to just discuss appropriate ministry to the un-churched?<br /><br />Or is it the side (nearly always very conservative and suburban) that so loaths a certain segment of our society that they would rather destroy the church (or at least it's historic polity) than even so much as BEGIN to discuss any contact with that segment at all?<br /><br />In fairness, the accusation of politics is also a two-way street.<br /><br />So too is the worry about possible decline of the church (from those concerned that it is not addressing legitimate pastoral needs as well as from those who would not want to even consider those needs at all).<br /><br />Another two way street is the concern over what a mess all this litigation has the potential to create for future generations of the church.<br /><br />After all, as I and others have repeatedly pointed out, the reason the PB and TEC see themselves as having NO CHOICE but to pursue litigation to the bitter end, cost what it may, is because of the potential damage to the church's patrimony and polity presented by these cases instigated by those leaving.<br /><br />This, it seems to me, is especially true in the case of the situation in VA. Its very idiosyncrasy is what makes it particularly important; it's the only case where a state law that directly contradicts the historic polity of the church is being used to attack that polity and patrimony. I even think we can all pretty much agree on the importance of that principle and the very real damage a decision in favor of the departing churches would cause the church (not just TEC but other hierarchical churches as well).<br /><br />Can we not simply agree that the litigation is damaging the church on both sides and should end as soon as possible?<br /><br />Most objective people would go further and agree that the only side that CAN give up without compromising the church's polity forever (and which has also lost very nearly every single case in litigation) is the side that should give up.<br /><br />bookguybaltmdAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post-28335148237524436082010-09-24T09:21:16.143-04:002010-09-24T09:21:16.143-04:00@ 'Annon of the IRS' - what's interest...@ 'Annon of the IRS' - what's interesting about your comment is that, although far from perfect, TEC has been MUCH more forthcoming about the source of it's funding than has the other side. ACNA and CANA don't even bother to answer questions AT ALL regarding the source of their funding.<br /><br />Isn't full disclosure a two-way street?<br /><br />Isn't an IRS investigation a two-way street?<br /><br />Wasn't that threat used under the Bush administration against a liberal parish in CA? And wasn't the administration's position not only dismissed but outright rebuked by the courts as an unfairly political use of the IRS? And given that the power of using the IRS for such a purpose (if it were even possible to use it that way) is currently in the hands of those who would agree with TEC is that a Pandora's box you really want to open?<br /><br />Just asking questions here.... Just asking for fairness here, too.<br /><br />BookguybaltmdAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post-82810190110387263312010-09-24T08:25:35.789-04:002010-09-24T08:25:35.789-04:00Sadly, however, the point continues to be missed. ...Sadly, however, the point continues to be missed. Litigation is taking its toll not only on those who are distressed over the politicizing of a church institution, but for those who remain in the church and see it's numbers and influence substantially diminish over the past twenty-five years. At some point, maybe after the current activists have gone off to their great reward, someone is going to have to deal with the mess left behind. Curmudgeon is pointing out that the proverbial writing on the wall is all ready there (and is receiving the same kind of reaction as the originator of that term did when he pointed out similar issues in his day) - but perhaps - as typical for the renowned "Me Generation" - we just don't care.<br /><br />bbAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17490745238430648958noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post-55974902938714540772010-09-24T04:28:39.401-04:002010-09-24T04:28:39.401-04:00The Curmudgeon often has some good points and no o...The Curmudgeon often has some good points and no one can accuse him of sloppy thinking. However, the costs of protecting these properties is, as others have said, not really avoidable unless the Presiding Bishop thinks she can convince all elements of the Church just to hand the things over to people who have departed. I don't see how she could, in good faith, do anything other than what she's doing. Both sides have probably incurred roughly equal costs. The side that could have most readily avoided this waste was the people who departed. If you leave a church for reasons of principle, just leave. Don't try to pinch things on the way out. It compromises your statement of principle about your departure and, what's more, it's just tacky. <br /><br />ScoutAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post-14582686750902664012010-09-24T00:37:23.830-04:002010-09-24T00:37:23.830-04:00I wonder if the IRS might look at TEC's 503(c)...I wonder if the IRS might look at TEC's 503(c) status if they know that TEC is not being transparent in its spending... hmmmm.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post-75083379590968162252010-09-23T19:08:46.056-04:002010-09-23T19:08:46.056-04:00I don't know who you are bookguy, but give'...I don't know who you are bookguy, but give'em heck!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post-85123194644353956172010-09-23T18:57:24.600-04:002010-09-23T18:57:24.600-04:00@ Ralph - since the legitimacy of their status as ...@ Ralph - since the legitimacy of their status as Bishops is in dispute, the lower (and more widely accepted) denomination seemed appropriate. I don't think they would be offended.<br /><br />It was a typo. My apologies on the name. But I note that it does provide you with a way of not dealing with the basic facts. <br /><br />Good misdirection there, Ralph. When in the wrong, obfuscate with the trivial and irrelevant: a very lawyer-ly tactic.<br /><br />@ Annon. I note that TEC has consistently disclosed what they know about the financing; one suspects them of not always knowing where the financing is coming from next and, therefore, not always being able to answer every question.<br /><br />I do know that there is a special fund set up for the defense of TEC to which one may send ones contributions and that a good many individuals have so contributed and in no small measure.<br /><br />One also notes that the other side has not disclosed even so much as one little hint of where their financing is coming from.<br /><br />Don't you think that, in fairness, CANA and ACNA et al should reveal at least as much as TEC has already revealed before TEC is asked to go further? Wouldn't that be simple fairness?<br /><br />bookguybaltmdAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post-71743996230536850152010-09-23T13:14:59.626-04:002010-09-23T13:14:59.626-04:00Well bookguybaltmd,
A typo is when a misplaced fi...Well bookguybaltmd,<br /><br />A typo is when a misplaced finger causes a strange looking word. However, when you spell the name incorrectly twice, with the resultant mis-pronounciation, it suggests that you do not really know his name. <br /><br />Intentionally calling Martyn Minns and Bob Duncan by "father" instead of "bishop" suggests a bit of stooping low or pettiness on your part as well. They are both bishops and have been duly consecrated as such in the Anglican Communion. <br /><br />However, there has been a lack of respect shown by all sides toward the clergy of the opposition, so I'll simply say that we will continue to disagree and I'll not comment further.<br /><br />RalphMAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post-53959881524716181972010-09-23T01:41:38.621-04:002010-09-23T01:41:38.621-04:00Thousands of Episcopalians signed a petition askin...Thousands of Episcopalians signed a petition asking for transparency and accountability in what is being spent on litigation. This has been ignored. As an Episcopalian, I have a right to know where the money is going. If not, then you don't get my money.<br /><br />A new anon to this threadAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post-41282673568782976602010-09-22T23:21:52.047-04:002010-09-22T23:21:52.047-04:00Mr. Book, you may want to check out the Curmudgeon...Mr. Book, you may want to check out the Curmudgeon's blog - he's quite amazing. I would not say that tossing flowers would describe what this man does - attorneys are not generally known for flower tossing and I am not sure I would equate such activities with this man's work.<br /><br />But check him out for yourself. You can read Curmudgeon here:<br /><br /><a rel="nofollow">http://accurmudgeon.blogspot.com/</a>Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17490745238430648958noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post-30241523340251885702010-09-22T20:03:05.375-04:002010-09-22T20:03:05.375-04:00SO? Really? All this time he's had standing ...SO? Really? All this time he's had standing and he's been tossing this stuff up against the wall of the web and no presentment at all? Nothing?<br /><br />Doesn't that kinda say something about the reliability of the source?<br /><br />Do you think it's possible that this might be because it's not exactly flowers he tossing up against the wall?<br /><br />I don't mean to be rude or out of line. I'm just askin'....<br /><br />;)<br /><br />bookguybaltmdAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post-18854831198352831412010-09-22T17:58:31.934-04:002010-09-22T17:58:31.934-04:00bookguybaltmd:
Just an FYI: The Anglican Curmudge...bookguybaltmd:<br /><br />Just an FYI: The Anglican Curmudgeon belongs to a church in the Diocese of Northern California, a TEC Church. His criticisms of the PB's spending on the lawsuits is an "inside" criticism, rather than an "outsider" or ACNA criticism.<br /><br />Deacon FrancieAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post-15856557966465766002010-09-22T14:48:13.441-04:002010-09-22T14:48:13.441-04:00@ RalphM
Danged typos.
It is, however, an inform...@ RalphM<br /><br />Danged typos.<br /><br />It is, however, an informal medium, no? I noted, for example, a number of typos in both your posts and that from Steven; I chose not to stoop so low as to comment on them. Typos, after all, don't invalidate my argument any more than your typos invalidate yours.<br /><br />I would grant you (happily) that I'm a little long-winded sometimes.... I worried about that, but it seemed necessary to rebut falsehoods one at a time. <br /><br />As for sources, my source for Minn's statements has been links provided right here on BB: specifically the Washington Post article that quotes his charge of 'apostasy' against TEC comes readily to mind. I grant you, that IS 3rd hand (Post to BB to me). But it was posted without contradiction as to the accuracy of his statements here or elsewhere and I trust BB as a first hand source to have corrected the error in the report had there been one.<br /><br />If true, Minn's statement was intemperate to say the least, clearly untrue and invalid; these statements seem to me to clearly discredit this man as a source of information or moral leadership. In that sense, my point stands.<br /><br />As for getting information 2nd or 3rd hand - the court documents are largely available on-line and I read them closely. Many have been found through links here at BB. I read and make up my own mind for myself. I hope that you and everyone else would do the same. I grant you that this does not seem to be universally the case on either side of the discussion.<br /><br />My point on the legal situation remains: TEC has consistently won or is winning almost every single case, including even the idiosyncratic one in VA; this fact suggests that the legal advice received by the departing congregations may have been tactically sophisticated, but has not been very good strategically or morally. This seems obvious.<br /><br />bookguybaltmdAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post-82948889584247116212010-09-22T14:02:11.630-04:002010-09-22T14:02:11.630-04:00bookguybaltmd:
Since you can't even get the s...bookguybaltmd:<br /><br />Since you can't even get the spelling of Bishop Minns name right, I'd suggest that you examine the credibility of your sources as well.<br /><br />In the case of the VA churches, it's obvious that you get your information 2nd or 3rd hand. I do not; I was and am there.<br /><br />RalphMAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post-54520375611819509972010-09-22T12:57:27.468-04:002010-09-22T12:57:27.468-04:006@ Steven
6. Mentors: Finally, I would like to t...6@ Steven<br /><br />6. Mentors: Finally, I would like to take this opportunity to urge you to reconsider your sources and mentors. Your side has lost ever single case that has been brought forward regarding the possibility of a parish or diocese separating from TEC. If the legal record were mixed, I would accept that there might have been some case. But, with such an overwhelming case history in favor of TEC, may I suggest that the legal advise you have been receiving may have been seriously flawed. It's easy to be mislead in the passion of the moment, but perhaps these events should make you reconsider the reliability of the source of that advise.<br /><br />Frankly, I am also concerned that the emotional nature of your language sounds very similar to that used by some of your spiritual leadership, Mimms and Duncan for example. Wild and patently untrue charges such as "blitzkrieg," or "bribes" and especially of "apostasy" are not only highly unproductive, they are clearly in bad faith. Anyone who follows and knows TEC directly, checking sources and quotes out for themselves, understands that these charges are simply not true. There are PLENTY of grounds for disagreement on political, social activist, or religious grounds without resorting to such falsehoods; I might even readily agree that those differences completely justify separation. However, if you find that you are being mislead with emotional rhetoric of this sort, I would, again, strongly urge you to reconsider the reliability and faithfulness of your sources.<br /><br />bookguybaltmdAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post-29440141379297372842010-09-22T12:56:53.802-04:002010-09-22T12:56:53.802-04:005@ Steven
5. Beyond that, language such as you po...5@ Steven<br /><br />5. Beyond that, language such as you posted makes it even less likely that a sale would ever be made to the exiting congregations even after the cases are completely settled. Even when the courts and/or the exiting congregations absolutely establish the church's patrimony and polity, any responsible legal TEC authority would look at your post, and/or the public statements of your Fr Mimms or Fr Duncan; inevitably, they would find it highly incumbent on themselves to steer far clear of any involvement with such organizations. The high incidence of false or misleading statements by your leadership, particularly Fr. Mimms charges of 'apostasy' (including some public reports that were posted without contradiction or correction here on BB) would make any kind of negotiation at least very difficult if not completely impossible.<br /><br />Any such responsible authority would be very reluctant to compromise the church's legal position and polity through any contact such as a sale would involve. In that case, yes, it is very unlikely that any sale would be to a dissenting congregations; it is FAR more likely that any such sale would be to a re-purposing organization or denomination. Such a sale would not compromise the church's legal position for future generations as would a sale to the exiting congregations. Frankly, the scorched earth and hate filled nature of the rhetoric and legal maneuverings of your leadership would make your organizations pariahs for any responsible church leader using any measure of due diligence in such a sale. Remember, as we have just discussed, the leadership of TEC is subject to presentment not only on violations of the cannons but also for any misappropriation of funds and/or church resources. I seriously doubt that, in the current highly charged atmosphere, a sale to the exiting congregations would be accepted without serious protest by the membership or leadership of TEC or the DoV.<br /><br />bookguybaltmdAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post-63141763102456737232010-09-22T12:55:46.614-04:002010-09-22T12:55:46.614-04:003/4@ Steven
3. Standing. As for the curmudgeon&#...3/4@ Steven<br /><br />3. Standing. As for the curmudgeon's charges, one can only note that he is criticizing a denomination to which he does not appear to belong; he is able to do so because TEC's budget and funding are publically disclosed. As a US citizen he is entitled to his opinion. But as a non-church member, his opinion is moot. One can only note that the open nature of TEC's finances is in direct contrast to ACNA's and CANA's funding, on which information is tightly controlled and not similarly disclosed nor is it in any way publically available. One does, however, hear disturbing and substantiated information that a substantial portion of that funding is coming from Roman catholic, as well as other non-anglican sources.<br /><br />4. Language: I am concerned by some of your choice of language. Using emotionally laden and misleading language seems counter-productive to the current issue under discussion: appropriate spending in legal cases and what form of negotiated settlement might or might not be possible. Such language choices as referring to TEC's mission activities as "TEC bribe money," denying the basic Christian evangelism and even the Christian nature of TEC, referring to TEC's legal actions as a "blitzkrieg," accusations of selling churches to Muslims, dog training schools, or saloons... These are all highly emotion laden choices you have made here. I submit that they are all more than misleading; in fact, they are all completely false characterizations. Do you honestly think that we have our fingers crossed as we faithfully say and mean the creeds every day? Such language can, in fact, be characterized, as a form of hate speech. I am surprised that BB would permit it.<br /><br />Your language also substantiates my earlier post regarding the impossibility of compromise and the unlikeliness of a possible sale to the exiting congregations. TEC and the PB are not able to negotiate with the exiting congregations while the cases are still going through the legal process because to do so would compromise the integrity of the church's polity, negatively impacting the church's legal case, and seriously damage her ability to protect her patrimony and her polity into future generations. It is absolutely essential that those principles not be compromised in any way. That is one of the reasons we have already discussed for why the cases must be continued until they are finally and justly closed. There is much more at stake here than the disposition of a few bits of real estate, however beautiful and historic. <br /><br />bookguybaltmdAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post-33822923745611465002010-09-22T12:55:00.852-04:002010-09-22T12:55:00.852-04:002@ Steven
2. Viability: there are two points her...2@ Steven <br /><br />2. Viability: there are two points here. The first is that although the legitimate congregations have clearly been grievously damaged by the current controversy, they are growing rapidly and seem likely to recover fully in time. This is particularly true once they are restored to their historic buildings. I would also point out that TEC is not only holding it's own amidst the current controversy, it is actually growing relative to other mainline Protestant denominations. In fact, the fastest growing congregations in TEC are those that are the most actively engaged in social concerns of our society. I have every confidence that once the current controversy is finally settled, the church's social witness combined with her evangelization of the un-churched will begin to bear significant fruit.<br /><br />The second point on the viability issue is to ask what the disposition of these buildings is to you. After all, assuming that the buildings rightfully belong to TEC, you have no voice in what becomes of them. You disenfranchised yourself on this question when you left TEC. By your own choice, neither you, nor the curmudgeon have standing on this issue.<br /><br />The PB's compliance with the cannons of the church: I would point out that, had the PB been in violation of the church's cannons a presentment could have been brought against her by anyone with standing in the church. The fact that no such presentment has been brought suggests that such charges as yours by those outside the church are groundless. In a highly fraught and litigious atmosphere, were there grounds for presentment, one would almost certainly find such an action of some sort. That fact that no such action has occurred or even been hinted at by any person or institution with standing suggests that there are no such grounds.<br /><br />In direct contrast, I would point out that ACNA and CANA have not won a single case in the courts and that several of those in leadership positions have been charged and convicted of criminal activity.<br /><br />bookguybaltmdAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post-11088610230292700882010-09-22T12:54:24.655-04:002010-09-22T12:54:24.655-04:001@ Steven - Thanks for your rant. At the risk of ...1@ Steven - Thanks for your rant. At the risk of being a bit off-topic, I'd like to respond to factual errors in a couple of your points, to address some concerns I have with some of the language that you chose to use, and discuss some of your information sources, their lack of reliability, and appropriate and productive mentors.<br /><br />1. Missions and Africa: You mentioned that you don't believe TEC maintains missions in Africa. As it happens TEC does continue to maintain missions in Africa. It's true that those missions have been curtailed in some areas: Nigeria and Uganda, for example. This has been largely at the request of the local church authorities whose local authority TEC continues to respect (in direct contrast to the lack of similar respect shown by some of these entities in the US).<br /><br />That does not mean that all mission activities in these areas have ceased (far from it!) or even that mission activity by TEC in Africa has been reduced. Indeed, total mission activities in Africa have actually increased, particularly in South Africa and the Sudan, for example. It is true that this activity has been focused much more in areas in which the local authorities are more welcoming than in some other areas. It should be noted that the areas of Africa that are less welcoming represent a very small proportion of the African continent.<br /><br />bookguybaltmdAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post-51021611437590284732010-09-22T05:23:11.109-04:002010-09-22T05:23:11.109-04:00@ Steven - Thanks for your rant Steven, but the fa...@ Steven - Thanks for your rant Steven, but the facts simply do not bear you out.<br /><br />As it happens, TEC continues to support missions all over the world. Those missions include a number in Africa and even several elements in Uganda and Nigeria. It's true that TEC has pulled back in some areas, but we are not entirely gone even from Nigeria and Uganda, for example.<br /><br />And, of course, those missions have not been cut off entirely, but have been shifted to other, more welcoming, areas such as South Africa, and Dioceses in other parts of Africa. Even in Africa, the areas that are supporting your tantrum are very limited.<br /><br />As for your second paragraph, I find the suggestion that TEC isn't Christian to be offensive. Do you think we have our fingers crossed when we recite the creeds every day? I am surprised that BB allows it.<br /><br />As for the capabilities of the rightful congregations, it is true that they have been grievously injured by the departing group's irresponsibility. But they are growing rapidly and, given the historic nature of the buildings and their location any reasonable person must have every confidence that they will recover fully in time.<br /><br />In the meanwhile, what's it to you what happens to the buildings? You have separated yourself from their rightful owner, TEC. They belong to a different denomination. When you left you lost your voice in their deposition.<br /><br />As it happens, far from "cratering," of the mainline protestant denominations, TEC is more than holding it's own. Once this disruption is past, it is clear that there is a very bright future in store for a faith that concentrates on bringing the loving and inclusive word of god to the un-churched.<br /><br />What does bother me considerably, is your emotionally laden choice of attack. Words like "blitzkrieg" and "serial abuser" don't seem appropriate to the facts of the cases. The import of your post also seems to be largely incorrect on the facts.<br /><br />I would strongly advise you to investigate the facts for yourself in the future. It seems that your sources of information on this subject are highly biased and factually inaccurate. I strongly suggest that you seek a more balanced mentor.<br /><br />As for the charges against the PB, there has never been a reasonable presentment brought against her by anyone with any standing. On the other hand, those who seem to be your advisers have been charged and convicted of criminal acts and have lost every single case in the courts.<br /><br />I will say, however, that it is exactly such statements and misinformation as your post that reinforce my belief that compromise became impossible after the leaving groups filed the original motions in court. Your post also increases my pessimism on the possibility of a sale of these assets to ACNA or CANA rather than some other denomination or even some other purpose entirely.<br /><br />This isn't just emotion speaking. The kind of emotionally burdened and counter-factual, hate-filled assault such as you posted makes me concerned that any sale or even any negotiation might be misinterpreted as compromising the church's patrimony.<br /><br />Any TEC church authority would be well advised to make every effort to steer well clear of opening any such discussion with those who share your position. Avoiding those with your views would simply be the appropriate due diligence of a cautious and responsible administrator.<br /><br />BookguybaltmdAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post-90736790375090780882010-09-22T04:51:29.627-04:002010-09-22T04:51:29.627-04:00@ Ralph M - Actually, the PBs position is that she...@ Ralph M - Actually, the PBs position is that she has a responsibility to protect the patrimony of the church.<br /><br />Unfortunately, the option to negotiate was removed when the thefting congregations unilaterally moved to court. There was no other option after that point and there never has been.<br /><br />Sorry that you chose to disenfranchised yourself and caused all this cost and disruption. But once you pulled that wire you didn't leave the PB or TEC any other choice.<br /><br />It is the leaving congregations who are displaying a lack of maturity here. Just because you don't win every political discussion, you decided to up and leave. A lot of 5 year olds have the same I'll take my toys and leave if I don't get my own way on everything. Aside from the immaturity, there is also the problem that they are NOT your toys. Those buildings belong now and forever to TEC/DoV.<br /><br />bookguybaltmdAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com