Updated Sunday morning
Episcopal News Service reports on the voting at the diocesan convention today.
Read San Joaquin votes to leave Episcopal Church, realign with Southern Cone by Pat McCaughan.
The full text of the bishop’s convention address can be found in this PDF file. And the Living Church has a story on that, Bishop Schofield Urges San Joaquin Delegates to Take Leap of Faith.
Initial press reports of this:
BBC US Church splits over gay rights
Associated Press Diocese Breaks With Episcopal Church
Reuters Calif. diocese leaves Episcopals in historic split
New York Times Episcopal Diocese Votes to Secede From Church by Neela Banerjee
Los Angeles Times Episcopal diocese secedes in rift over gays by Rebecca Trounson (and in the print edition with the headline California diocese leaves Episcopal Church in rift over gays, theology)
Central Valley Business Times Central Valley Episcopal diocese splits from national church
San Francisco Chronicle Episcopal fold loses 1st diocese – in valley
Fresno Bee Diocese splits from national Episcopalians
Modesto Bee Diocese will leave Episcopal Church
Bakersfield Californian Diocese votes to split from church
At least the NYT got the headline right (i.e., regardless what these *persons* voted for, the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin ain’t going anywhere)
Lord have mercy!
It was interesting to hear Bishop Schofield quote from Jim Packer in his speech calling for the break. Packer has also joined Southern Cone. His whole ministry has been one of rejecting Anglo-catholicism as an aberration , which has corrupted reformed Anglicanism. Yet San Joaquin believes in baptismal regeneration, prayers for the dead and the real presence etc It would seem that the new denomination turns a blind eye to heresy when it wants. By the way Schofield in his reply to Bishop Schori affirmed that San Joaquin had the same view of order as Rome. No…San Joaquin ordains women… Read more »
Be sure to check out this link — http://tinyurl.com/2om7r3 — for a good look at what passes for “orthodoxy” in Fresno. It puts Schofield’s martyr act in a whole new light.
I agree with what Charlotte posted on another thread – it is absolutely astonishing that the ABC doesn’t comment on any of this at all.
What can he possibly be thinking?
Is there anyone here who could make some sense out of it, without just insulting Rowan’s ability?
An interesting analysis on Lionel Deimel’s blog
http://www.deimel.org/commentary/blogger/atom.xml
That’s frightening as hell Erika. And we are worried about the Taliban here in the west?
Good find.
A better link to my analysis is http://deimel.org/commentary/blogger/2007/12/now-what.htm
Lionel,
The link you posted doesn’t seem to work
Says +Venables:
“Welcome Home. And welcome back into full fellowship in the Anglican Communion.”
to San Joaquin. Pretty amazing. Have any of the 4 instruments of communion sanctioned this +Lyons and +Venables’ cross jurisdiction incursions and poaching? Or is who is and isn’t a member of the Communion +Venables’ singular call?
Erika, my thoughts on ++Rowan’s silence and apparent approval of the events in San Joaquin are on the next thread up (“More on San Joaquin”).
My thoughts are not happy ones right now.
Additional gloomy comments are at Father Jake’s blog at http://frjakestopstheworld.blogspot.com/2007/12/leaders-of-san-joaquin-abandon.html
It’s the full stop at the end that causes Lionel’s link to fail. I have fixed it above.
According to The Living Church article referenced in the thread above, Emily H., ++Rowan gave this plan his blessing in November. His letter to +John Howe reflects similar thinking. So we must assume that this is happening with ++Rowan’s foreknowledge and blessing.
I hope to be eating my words soon — but at this point, strange as it is, it seems that ++Rowan approves of and consents to San Joaquin’s actions. Thus his Singapore discourse, which says that the Church is in God’s hands, should be read as his act of hand-washing.
I think it is best to assume nothing and wait to hear from the archbishop directly.
Charlotte, I wouldn’t give up hope just yet: what we have here is something like the old game of telephone, in which Schofield says that Lyons told him that Venables told Lyons that Williams said to Venables that it was OK. Of course, Rowan could help matters by clearing things up. If the past is any indication, however, he will remain silent for a few weeks before issuing some unintelligible statement that actually makes things worse and requires a clarification from his staff. It’s funny how he has time to speak out on global warming, the prayer habits of Muslims,… Read more »
“I would be surprised to hear that the Archbishop would formally support such a development which is contrary to the Windsor Report,” -The Reverend Canon Kenneth Kearon, Anglican Communion Secretary General, November 27th letter to a Fort Worth Delegate.
Still think ++Williams has given this a “blessing”?
Frank is right. Let’s see what he’ll have to say.
Let them go – good riddance.
This should be looked at as an opportunity – a straightforwardly liberal province without the cancer of conservatism.
The folks at Remain Episcopal in the diocese may be reached via their website.
See: http://www.remainepiscopal.org/
Note the support being expressed from all over the world to the remaining Episcopalians. Also note, Remain Episcopal is a bona fide IRS Code 501(c)(3)organization as it may pertain to any donations.
Alas. Lord have mercy.
Says +Venables:
“Welcome Home. And welcome back into full fellowship in the Anglican Communion.”
to San Joaquin. Pretty amazing. Have any of the 4 instruments of communion sanctionec this +Lyons and +Venables’ cross jurisdiction incursions and poaching? Or is who is and isn’t a member of the Communion +Venables’ singular call?
“Of course, Rowan could help matters by clearing things up. If the past is any indication, however, he will remain silent for a few weeks before issuing some unintelligible statement that actually makes things worse and requires a clarification from his staff.
It’s funny…” JPM
Trouble is, I started laughing at this paragraph.
Rowan has helped tremendously. He said nothing, except through Kearon. The boys, Duncan, Iker, Schofield had to make their own decisions. Rowan has no control over them. They were given fair warning. They lie and cheat, and now have stolen the property of SJoaquin. They did not have the endorsement of Rowan, and they knew it. They may have had the intention of trying to get his endorsement… But Schofield didn’t. By the way, it has not escaped some of us that fast-draw McSchofield may have shot himself in the foot trying to pull his gun so fast. It may… Read more »