March 25, 2017

February 16, 2010


Copy of TEC Memo Circulated at CoE Synod








Share this story:


Recent Related Posts

Comments

50 comments

Gee, I didn’t know the liberals could hold attention long enough to read that whole thing.  Awfully suspect that that much verbiage had to go to one private member motion, isn’t it?  Methinks they do protest too much.  Especially since the material in their print can be verified or falsified by the attentive Internet user.

[1] Posted by dwstroudmd+ on 2-16-2010 at 05:39 PM · [top]

No one is “locked out” except the reasserters (see CT).
It is the choice of the members where to go to church.
Lies, tangled webs, exaggerations, spin, etc. etc.

Grannie Gloria

[2] Posted by Grandmother on 2-16-2010 at 05:54 PM · [top]

...one parishioner says this
...one parishioner says that
...somebody was “kicked out” of their church

Sounds familiar - but on the “other side” - it certainly doesn’t refute the facts on the ground that the conservative/orthodox are getting the short end of the stick.  This is nothing but a bunch of he says/she says “personal experiences” - and says nothing about the incredible scope of salted fields that TEC is leaving behind.
I only got about a third of the way through before I had to stop - it makes my stomach hurt. 

Talk to the Kennedys about being “kicked out” of their church and their home - both of which still stand empty a year later, don’t they? 
Talk to persons near and dear to me who stand to lose their home in Pittsburgh because the faux “diocese” says they own the property - which will again stand empty for years and years, rather than housing fruitful ministries.  This is such a load of…fertilizer.

[3] Posted by GillianC on 2-16-2010 at 06:03 PM · [top]

What went first?
++Rowan Williams asking to be “three-dimensional”?
Or TEC warning not to fell in over-simplification that comes with “two-dimensional” terms?
Who is endorsing the other’s view?

[4] Posted by Antonio on 2-16-2010 at 06:12 PM · [top]

I’m just so glad that TEC doesn’t mess with the internal politics of other provinces within the Communion. It just warms my heart that they trust the CoE to see through the lies and the political clout; and that by the grace and prompting of the Holy Spirit they will, without any lobbying or rallying or influencing on TEC’s part, come to the truth.

Oh, wait, I suppose I may want to re-think some of that last paragraph.

Yours in Christ,
jacob

[5] Posted by Jacobsladder on 2-16-2010 at 06:25 PM · [top]

Part of the deception here is the repeated use of the phrase “Episcopal Church property”. The English, having an established church, wouldn’t be expected to see the finesse (LIE) here - there is no such thing as Episcopal Church property since property is held by corporations and not unincorporated associations. Each piece of property is owned by a corporation which holds the deeds. Each deed might or might not have an explicit trust clause.

This is an extension of TEO’s “shock and confuse” strategy. In the US it’s dependent on confusing jurists into thinking that TEO is somehow like the Roman Catholic Church (which *does* have the relevant diocesan corporation on the deed). In England, the strategy involves confusing the CoE into thinking TEO is legally established. Neither is a true statement, but you can for a time confuse people (especially doddering old judges and bishops).

Another way of looking at this is the TEO leadership is playing a game of three-card monte where the CoE and various US courts are the marks. Unfortunately, it’s not clear there are any police (other than the Lord) to come along, braid a whip of cords and overturn these tables in the temple.

Cheers,
Doug

[6] Posted by Doug Stein on 2-16-2010 at 06:27 PM · [top]

This is disingenouous, to say the least.  They claim to be “locked out of their own churches,” when nothing could possibly be further from the truth!  In my own church, for example, we turn NO ONE away, we don’t lock them out, we don’t discriminate against them, and we welcome everyone who is a committed Christian or who is seeking to know Christ.

[7] Posted by Cennydd on 2-16-2010 at 06:38 PM · [top]

So much misinformation.  7000+ in Fort Worth “displaced”?
I don’t think so!  I can hardly read a sentence of this statement without finding “misstatements of truth”.  Not that I should be surprised by that anymore considering the source! 
I just hope the Synod understands that just because they write or say things what is really the truth is totally different!

[8] Posted by cbates on 2-16-2010 at 06:44 PM · [top]

According to his entry in the Clerical Directory: Christian names Charles Kevin. Born 64 El Paso, BA VPI 85, M.Div. Virginia seminary 93, PhD Durham 1999. Deacon 6/93 Priest 1/94 Bp. Howe Central FL. Married 91 3 children. St. John’s Melbourne 93-96, Served CofEngland 96-99 Milledgeville GA 99-04, Canon to Ordinary Arizona 04-07, Canon to PB since 07. Lots of papers including one on Batman as Humanistic Myth and various awards.
His ministry so far seems to be 3 to 5 years in any one place.

[9] Posted by TomRightmyer on 2-16-2010 at 07:03 PM · [top]

I swear that Tom Woodward is the ghost writer of this rather unconvincing document…
Intercessor

[10] Posted by Intercessor on 2-16-2010 at 07:47 PM · [top]

According to a one Episcopalian, the radical conservative Anglo-Nazis have chased him through town after town, slandered and defamed him and have even gone so far as to threaten his very life. He is so afraid that he wears a kevlar vest for protection and never is seen in his office more than one or two days a month. Oh, the pain. Oh, the inhumanity.

Problem is that some folks in the CoE are gonna buy this hook, line and sinker.

[11] Posted by bdino on 2-16-2010 at 08:07 PM · [top]

Fort Worth - don’t even get me started.
The number of votes on the CoE’s resolution indicates that they did not believe it anyway.

[12] Posted by martin5 on 2-16-2010 at 09:11 PM · [top]

You can be sure that these mistatements of fact by TEC, like the others, were addressed directly, publicly and privately by the AAC.

[13] Posted by PhilAshey on 2-16-2010 at 09:25 PM · [top]

Does anyone else think that it is a real task to read through this essay and that few people at the Synod invested the time? At least we know what the party line is, if we care to wade through all the verbiage. But as a PR piece I think it is soporific at best aside from its spin.

[14] Posted by Adam 12 on 2-16-2010 at 09:26 PM · [top]

Some people at Synod did read the piece.  It was important to rebut for those who were undecided.  During the debate, some of TEC’s “proxies” tried to introduce the stories (from Virginia) on the floor.

[15] Posted by PhilAshey on 2-16-2010 at 10:04 PM · [top]

Drat!  They’re on to us!

DoW

[16] Posted by DietofWorms on 2-16-2010 at 10:04 PM · [top]

and in other news flash forward… 2.1 million Episcopalians have been locked out of the heaven by a mean ole God. The Presiding Bishop said, “It’s an over simplification to say that there is only one way to heaven. Yet many of our members find themselves locked out and unable to enter into God’s presence. Clearly it cannot be us who are the offenders here, when all we desire is to walk in love and unity with others.”

[17] Posted by Festivus on 2-16-2010 at 10:12 PM · [top]

The implicit but clear claim here is that those who have left and formed ACNA and similar groups constitute faithful, Conservative, Bible-Believing, creedal-orthodox Christians.  Likewise those who remain in TEC secularized, liberal heretics.

Now, I don’t want to be accused of painting anyone who stays in TEC with a broad brush, so I’ll confine my comparisons to leadership types, sanctioned by the National Church and their behaviors, ok?

Ok, that’s fair, let’s test that theory.  Which side would you say it is, ACNA or BeerKat et. al. who….

1. Gives money to organizations that sponsor abortions? 
2. Allows professors in seminaries and Bishops from the pulpit to promote the idea that God does not exist?
3. Has questioned and in many ways denied the nature and Resurrection of Christ himself?
4. Has discarded Scriptural teachings on sexual sin?
5. Has discarded Scriptural teachings on marriage?
6. Sues fellow Christians and forces Bishops who don’t want to sue to do the same?
7. Refuses to acknowledge Jesus Christ as the Way, the Truth, and the Life, and the only way to Salvation?

How’s that for a new 7 deadly sins for you?

Gee, so far I’m liking the ACNA’s chances in my little comparison.  So far…

KTF!...mrb

[18] Posted by Mike Bertaut on 2-16-2010 at 10:31 PM · [top]

Phil Ashey wrote:

You can be sure that these mistatements of fact by TEC, like the others, were addressed directly, publicly and privately by the AAC.

and

Some people at Synod did read the piece.  It was important to rebut for those who were undecided.  During the debate, some of TEC’s “proxies” tried to introduce the stories (from Virginia) on the floor.

Phil, thank you for the excellent work by you and your colleagues. It is so important for the cause of orthodoxy in England and USA that liberal spin and garbage be shown up for what it is. Hopefully this will be the start of a change of understanding and a change of *heart* by many uncommitted anglicans in CofE.

[19] Posted by MichaelA on 2-16-2010 at 10:40 PM · [top]

Martin5,

The number of votes on the CoE’s resolution indicates that they did not believe it anyway.

That surely has to be right. How could anyone who believed this drivel vote ‘yea’ in good conscience, even for the very limited motion which made it through?

Hopefully this has been a real eye-opener for the members of General Synod and they will take the news back to their own churches.

[20] Posted by MichaelA on 2-16-2010 at 10:43 PM · [top]

I’d be very much surprised if they didn’t.

[21] Posted by Cennydd on 2-16-2010 at 11:43 PM · [top]

And I’ve got news for you, Canon Robertson:

There is NOTHING “so-called” about the Anglican Church in North America!  We ARE the Anglican Church!  Get used to that fact, because we’re not going to go away!

[22] Posted by Cennydd on 2-16-2010 at 11:49 PM · [top]

And just in case you haven’t noticed, we’re GROWING, and TEC is SHRINKING!

[23] Posted by Cennydd on 2-17-2010 at 12:50 AM · [top]

With regard to Christ Church, to set the record straight I was there the day of the vote.  Marc had been clear for the two weeks prior that you needed to have your letter in the church office prior to the vote.  I have no recollection of different colored ballots as the tables were on the portico and you queued up alphabetically to get your ballot and they all appeared the same to me.

If anybody has any doubts as to Marc Robertson’s character or theology, I encourage you to visit the church website and listen to his sermons.  christchurchsavannah.org   They can be found by clicking on “Bulletins and Audio” on the left of the home page.  He is a consumate professional in his vocation, a great father and husband, and an all round good guy.  He is one of the finest pastors I have been around in my 53 years on this celestial ball.

I don’t know who wrote the article but I don’t think he let the facts get in the way of a good story.

[24] Posted by ty1028 on 2-17-2010 at 06:24 AM · [top]

This article is all about the “emotional spin”...no facts were coming forth, just rumor and innuendo.

I couldn’t even stomach the whole thing. 

Pitiful.

[25] Posted by B. Hunter on 2-17-2010 at 07:05 AM · [top]

Cennydd (NO. 7)If you are in a church that permits continuing Episcopalian worship, I think you are an exception rather that the rule.  I salute you for that and suspect that that takes a lot of the sting out of it for those who did not choose to leave.  Unhappily, in a lot of parishes in our area, where people left the Episcopal church, they continued to use and occupy the buildings and have refused those who stayed permission to continue to worship with Episcopal clergy.  We certainly have been “locked out.”  Of course, anyone can worship there, just like I could go to a Unitarian Church or, probably, a synagogue, and no one would turn me away, but the result has been that those hundreds of people in the largest parish so affected who did not vote to leave now cannot continue to worship as Epsicopalians in premises that they have supported spiritually and financially for decades.

[26] Posted by NoVA Scout on 2-17-2010 at 07:16 AM · [top]

In regards to Christ Church Savannah, I don’t think it was Christ Church who filed the lawsuit causing them to spend untold resources in litigation.  I believe the suit was filed by the Diocese of Georgia and then Bishop Henry Louttit.  In regards to the congregation not leaving the property on Bull Street - there is a reason - the case is on appeal with the Georgia Supreme Court.  In regards to consecrations having to take place at other places for the new bishop, I think this statement is a falsehood.  When Bishop Louttit was consecrated as Bishop in the Diocese, the Roman Catholic Cathedral was used for the consecration, not Christ Church.  In regards to having a funeral at a congregation that has departed, I wonder if they even bother to ask Christ Church if it could be held there.  I know the Virginia Churches have allowed funerals to take place of members of the congregation who are no longer part of their membership.  This report is full of errors just the typical spin from TEC.

[27] Posted by seminarian on 2-17-2010 at 07:47 AM · [top]

but the result has been that those hundreds of people in the largest parish so affected who did not vote to leave now cannot continue to worship as Epsicopalians in premises that they have supported spiritually and financially for decades.

I think that in most split parishes, both sides of the debate can claim to have supported the premises spiritually and finacially for decades, and both sides can tell stories about being “locked out.”

Nevertheless, while I appreciate the effort of Phil and the AAC, I’m not sure back and forth on exchanges of horror stories and abuse was the best way to convince the COE Synod to enter into a formal relationship of “Full Communion.”  But we shall see eventually, assuming they don’t just keep kicking the can.

[28] Posted by AndrewA on 2-17-2010 at 08:03 AM · [top]

Hmmm.  The conservatives are bad people.  Anecdotal evidence shows that people got their feelings hurt.

Well, I guess it’s better that having a discussion about the real issue of orthodoxy versus heresy. 

This missive would only be persuasive if it took on the doctrinal questions and refuted them one by one, leaving TEC standing on the top of the heap.  But, of course, they can’t do that.

[29] Posted by Paul B on 2-17-2010 at 08:12 AM · [top]

I am wondering if there would be value in dividing this up into sections and posting one section each day so it can be parsed.

[30] Posted by Adam 12 on 2-17-2010 at 08:40 AM · [top]

Nice.  The one brandishing the whip claims to be the “victim”.

[31] Posted by midwestnorwegian on 2-17-2010 at 09:29 AM · [top]

I seem to recall that Uncle Screwtape advised Wormwood that it was “jargon, not argument” that was the devils’ best tool.

[32] Posted by JoshuaB on 2-17-2010 at 10:40 AM · [top]

What is truly disappointing in this letter is that there is not one mention of the shadowy cadre of eccentric billionaires that is funding this whole operation for us. The part where they talk about the Chapman memo hints at it, but they don’t go the full way and reveal who funded the writing of our nefarious plan.  “Follow the Money”, as Jim Naughton likes to say.

That said, I must say I am a little disappointed in our shadowy cadre of eccentric billionaires.  If they can’t influence the CoE synod, what good are they? The CoE synod is not exactly the teamsters union, you would think buying their influence would be a piece of cake.  Can we somehow get a new shadowy cadre of eccentric billionaires?  Our current cadre doesn’t seem to do squat.

DoW

[33] Posted by DietofWorms on 2-17-2010 at 02:01 PM · [top]

Little mention of the Virginia churches or the Connecticut Six (and the changing of the locks by the bishop and his henchmen) or others of the more extreme examples of TEC abuse -or the lack of conciliation, love and mutual agreement between Matt’s church (the Church of the Good Shepherd which now stands barren and empty) and the diocese.
Very selective set of lies and misrepresentations, sadly typical of TEC over the past years.

One hopes that more clergy of the CofE will study the Episcopalian/Anglican situation and form more accurate conclusions.  I hope that thorough understanding of what has/is happening in this country and in Canada in the church will be a salutary lesson to clergy and laity within the CofE as they face their own disintegration.

[34] Posted by Bill C on 2-17-2010 at 02:04 PM · [top]

Phil Ashey,

I’m really glad you were there to help combat all the lies and misleading spin put forth in this stinking document and by TEC’s lobbyists.  From what I’ve read elsewhere (IRD), it must have helped that the ACNA was represented by the likes of +Don Harvey, Tony Baucom+ (of Truro), Cynthia Brust (of AMiA), and Dr. Michael Howell (FiF-US).

Keep up the good work, Phil!

David Handy+

[35] Posted by New Reformation Advocate on 2-17-2010 at 03:09 PM · [top]

For the sake of the faithful who read Stand Firm, I thought it best to address a number of inaccuracies found within the TEC report circulated at the C of E Synod. As a bit of preamble, I am thankful to God that He sees fit to make me a target of such libel, and that my Lent begins with His blessing: “Blessed are you when others revile you and persecute you and utter all kinds of evil against you falsely on my account” (Matthew 5:11). I am flattered to receive this much ink from TEC!
The document seems to imply that I secretly changed the parish charter immediately after my arrival in 1992. Actually, the change in our charter came in 2006, upon a unanimous vote from our Vestry, according to the established by-laws of the parish an in accordance with the existing canons of the Diocese of Georgia, which did not require episcopal notification. The change in charter did not alter our ecclesiastical status, but rather defined our parish theologically,  not institutionally, which is the way it had existed from its founding (in 1733) until 1918. The change in charter also brought us up to date with various aspects of Georgia corporate law. The Vestry of Christ Church had for several months requested conversation with the Bishop of Georgia in order to discuss several of our theological concerns with him. After not responding to multiple requests over several months, the Bishop did indeed meet with us, and these(unproductive) discussions present the historical context of our change in our charter, though not necessarily its cause. If I was such a seditious priest, why was I appointed to assist in bringing speakers and programs to diocesan clergy conferences, or appointed dean of the Savannah Convocation (clericus), or even asked to preach at one of the Diocesan Conventions, upon the last-minute cancelation of the invited preacher? Of course, the kicker is, why would the vestry call me and the Bishop of Georgia (then the Rt. Rev. Harry Shipps) interview and approve me if I were such a destructive priest? Keep in mind that TEC was in a different place in 1992, and I am certainly willing to admit so was I. The continued theological fragmentation of TEC continued, and I believe, by God’s grace, my ability to recognize and speak to that fragmentation grew clearer.
The decision to appropriate funds from our Endowment was duly inacted through the Endowment Agreement, which is the legal instrument governing the Fund itself. It required prior public written notice to the congregation, and could have hardly been secretive.
The vote to disaffiliate from TEC was not required by our polity, but was exercised to discern a sense of confirmation from the congregation. Public notice for several weeks was put forth, describing from the by-laws what constituted a “voting member in good standing.” Anyone who wished to vote was allowed to vote, but those votes which were cast by individuals not found on our member-in-good-standing roster were received as provisional votes. The votes was 87% in favor of coming under the ecclesiastical protection of the Province of Uganda, and 13% opposed. There were 28 provisional votes cast. If every provisional vote had been in the negative, the vote would have still been well beyond a “super majority” in favor of disaffiliation. Recently, those provisional votes were opened and counted: 22 in favor of disaffiliation, 6 against. There were over 280 votes cast on that particular Sunday in October, 2007. As far as we can recognize, 22 individuals who may be recognized as somewhat active in Christ Church at the time of the vote are currently worshipping at Christ Church Episcopal.
The figures cast about regarding parish membership are most misleading. Membership roles of old congregations are hard to manage well. An on-roll membership of about 900 would be a good estimate for Christ Church today, though it means little. Our mailing list would be larger; our “members in good standing” list would be smaller. Average Sunday Attendnce (ASA) is probably the best indicator of parish involvement and common life. I checked our worship records, and our ASA for the two years prior to my arrival in 1992 are around 320-350 on a given Sunday, though the numbers were higher from September to May and quite lower in the summer. Today’s ASA at Christ Church is approximatley 375-80 per Sunday, and the variance between summer and the rest of the year is less. In our 2010 stewardship campaign, we received 28 new pledging units, the largest single-year increase in my tenure. This last Sunday, we welcomed five new families into Christ Church. We are very grateful to God for what He is doing in our midst—it is all by His grace and to His glory.
I’m not sure about intimidation. We have had a number of families leave Christ Church over the years, for all sorts of reasons. I can say this: I have never personally sued anyone; but I, along with fourteen other vestry members are being personally sued by the Diocese of Georgia and TEC, as well as Christ Church Episcopal. Would that count as intimidation?
The matter with The Rev. Susan Harrison is the most egregious mis-statement of all. Though we had substantial theoloical disagreements, it was Susan who came to me (in 2005) personlly and informed me that she would be leaving Christ Church and re-assigned to another ministry by Bishop Louttit. We prayed together, hugged one another, and she left. I kept up with her and we prayed for her regularly in Sunday worship during her battle with cancer. Upon hearing of her death, with clear support from Vestry leadership, I offered Christ Church as the venue for her funeral. When I made the phone call, the priest in charge of Christ Church Episcopal and other lay leadership from that congregation were present and discussing funeral plans. Susan’s husband graciously took my call. I went by later to visit the family and was personally informed by him that, while they were most thankful for the offer of Christ Church, they had decided upon a different venue. They repeated their thanks for our offer. I and a significant number of Christ Church parishioners attended Susan’s funeral, though I was unable to receive communion, given our sad divisions.
It is a bit awkward to launch into such personal matters on behalf of my defense. I truly believe in my heart that the Lord Himself is my defense, and though a “miserable offender,” I stand under His most gracious Lordship. Nevertheless, I believe in these conflicted and chaotic times that God is best honored with the truth, and I have done my best to offer it to the readership of Stand Firm for your edification and God’s glory.
May this lenten season bring you God’s peace and grace.
—Marc Robertson
(still) Rector of Christ Church, Savannah

[36] Posted by Marc on 2-17-2010 at 03:27 PM · [top]

Fr. Marc, Christ Church and all there who are being targeted by TEC and the Diocese of Georgia are in my prayers.

[37] Posted by oscewicee on 2-17-2010 at 04:15 PM · [top]

Fr. Marc, that is some serious, hurtful lies told in that TEC memo, especially the part about Rev. Harrison.  I am not sure how Canon C. K. Robertson can live with himself.  He needs to be called out on these lies.

The Rev. Canon C. K. Robertson, Ph.D.
Canon to the Presiding Bishop and Primate
  E-mail: .(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)
Phone: (212) 716-6278

[38] Posted by DietofWorms on 2-17-2010 at 04:26 PM · [top]

... a one-sided and noticeably selective report ...

Funny he should mention that.

[39] Posted by Matt. on 2-17-2010 at 04:26 PM · [top]

26. NoVA Scout, we are an ACNA mission, and we turn no one away….“continuing Episcopalians” included.  They worship with us, with our affiliation unmentioned (most of the time), and if there are any present among us as guests, we don’t know it, and we don’t ask them about it.

[40] Posted by Cennydd on 2-17-2010 at 05:16 PM · [top]

Fr. Marc #36, I grieve to hear of all of this un-Christ-like activity in Georgia and the persecution accelerates for those still in TEC. For your edification, I am posting here a segment from the Watch Night Service attributed to John Wesley ...possibly 1755. Actually, you may be aware of it given the history of Christ Church, although Wesley+ penned this in England if the date is correct.

May it bless you as you Stand Firm for His sake.
YSIC,
Merlena Cushing

I am no longer my own, but thine.  Put me to what thou wilt, rank me with whom thou wilt; put me to doing, put me to suffering; let me be employed for thee or laid aside for thee, exalted for thee or brought low for thee; let me be full, let me be empty; let me have all things, let me have nothing; I freely and heartily yield all things to thy pleasure and disposal.  And now, O glorious and blessed God, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, thou art mine, and I am thine.  So be it.  And the covenant which I have made on earth, let it be ratified in heaven. Amen.

[41] Posted by merlenacushing on 2-17-2010 at 06:04 PM · [top]

This is a bit off topic but Festivus reminded us of this gem from Her Syncetic Majesty:

The Presiding Bishop said, “It’s an over simplification to say that there is only one way to heaven.

...and the thought struck me: She thinks that she has all these different paths to God yet she hasn’t found a single one of them!

[42] Posted by Nikolaus on 2-17-2010 at 10:08 PM · [top]

“There has been much damage done by those who have sought nothing less than to undermine the Church and establish their own competing system in its place.”

This one sentence reveals so much.  First of all, they still don’t get it that they are the ones who have undermined the Church with their idolatrous revisions.  Secondly, we did not infiltrate and corrupt a godly Church; those who realign seek to separate from that corruption as we feel called to do so.  When will they realize that “the Church” is not the buildings or the canons or the power politics?  The Church is the Body of Christ.  The Body of Christ cannot be legislated to be something other than it is.  It can, however, be joined to a (theological) prostitute.  Harsh language, I know, but it is not mine.  It is Paul’s.  (1 Corinthians 6:15-20)

[43] Posted by Modest Mystic on 2-18-2010 at 08:46 AM · [top]

Thanks for going to trouble to write a response to the part of the TEC Memo about Christ Church, Savannah, Marc.

I’m going to bump your response to the top, since it’s important that CC, Savannah’s integrity be revealed, and of course, the lies of others are revealed as well.

Clarity is a good thing.

[44] Posted by Sarah on 2-18-2010 at 09:45 AM · [top]

It looks like you’ve pretty much said it all, Modest Mystic!  Good!  Keep it coming!

[45] Posted by Cennydd on 2-18-2010 at 09:48 AM · [top]

I’ve already stated in a blog post of my own what I think of the Canon’s ability to observe and report correctly and truthfully.  So, I’m not surprised to see and read the host of inaccuracies flouted in this memo.
You know, there is the absolutist maxim, “If you’re not part of the solution, you’re part of the problem.”  The Canon definitely fits into this maxim, and he is definitely part of the problem for TECUSA.  The longer this memo stands in the public, the more rounds are fired in TECUSA’s administrative foot.
I would love to read his report on what happened with the Standing Committee in San Joaquin in Dec 2007 through March of 2008.  If the above memo is any indication, the report would be a travesty of the truth.

[46] Posted by Rob Eaton+ on 2-18-2010 at 02:11 PM · [top]

One other thing:  The author of this memo didn’t mention that our bishop, ++John-David Schofield, was apparently ignored by his fellow bishops for nearly 20 years.  So much for listening to others’ opinions in the HoB, and for TEC’s much-touted “inclusiveness!”

[47] Posted by Cennydd on 2-18-2010 at 08:12 PM · [top]

No. I don’t think you folks yet understand how truly “EVIL” these women are.  For ten years now my husband had been blacklisted from becoming fully employed. The gentlest, most effective and loved professor of the very subject these gals want to claim   as their own.  Yet, when I spoke out against a few of these women—my church shunned me. For ten years these women have stalked me and contacted our new neighbors wherever we go. For ten years now these very same women who gave you KJS have been causing my family harm in so many spiteful ways. 

NO YOU DO NOT YET UNDERSTAND HOW TRULY EVIL THESE WOMEN ARE!

[48] Posted by lost on 2-19-2010 at 07:03 AM · [top]

Normally, when one sets out to create a scurrilous attack like that of Rev. Canon Robertson on Christ Church Savannah, one would assume that you would at least attempt to have some of your assertions be “half truths”. If challenged you may offer that your words were “taken out of context” or “misinterpreted”. Clearly Canon Robertson or his sources were not concerned by that eventuality because they decided that pure fiction or fantasy would communicate their legal agenda much better than facts. As I read how Christ Church, the Mother Church of Georgia, founded in 1733 had, under the current leadership had gone from 900 members to 300 I sat dumbfounded. What was this about? What was the assertion of “calculated and deliberate effort….to isolate those members who embraced the doctrine of the Episcopal church.”, what?

As for the vote to disassociate from TEC, those people who were not allowed to vote were NOT members. Most were people who had long since left Christ Church as people are want to do, and did not meet any of the very clearly communicated criterion for membership. Again, this represents fantasy or the directed effort of Canon Robertson and his sources of these fantasies to distort the facts purely to attain an end at the expense and reputation of the congregation of Christ Church.

The darkest assertions are those surrounding the late Rev. Susan Harrison, a friend of many years. I refuse to go into any further discussion on this topic, but the assertions surrounding her funeral were so rank that it is questionable that any person of God could even purport them to be true, which of course they were not.

The demonstrated jack boot techniques employed by ECUSA and their minions in the form of the diocesan bishops to garner the real estate of disassociated parishes is seen by all for what it is.

As for Christ Church, almost 90% of our parish voted to dissacciate from TEC. Our congregation is intact, an unbroken line, and the ongoing congregration of the Anglican church founded in 1733. We have been out of our historic parish home several times in our history, and we may find ourselves out of it again. That doesn’t diminish our congregation or what we stand for or believe in. The fact that Christ Church - Episcopal, founded in 2007 might be its new tenant, well, so be it. Christ Church will go on. And that is factually correct.

[49] Posted by Bob H on 2-24-2010 at 04:24 PM · [top]

It is important that the faithful take the time to refute each of the distortions in this document, and do so formally, and more than once. A document like this may well have a residual effect on christians in the CofE, if it is not countered.

It is interesting that the leadership of TEC usually try to commit as little as possible to paper - after all, if you take a position, then you give other people the opportunity to debate that position. And TEC generally does NOT like reasoned debate. Thanks for posting this.

[50] Posted by MichaelA on 9-19-2010 at 05:42 PM · [top]

Registered members are welcome to leave comments. Log in here, or register here.

Comment Policy: We pride ourselves on having some of the most open, honest debate anywhere. However, we do have a few rules that we enforce strictly. They are: No over-the-top profanity, no racial or ethnic slurs, and no threats real or implied of physical violence. Please see this post for more explanation, and the posts here, here, and here for advice on becoming a valued commenter as opposed to an ex-commenter. Although we rarely do so, we reserve the right to remove or edit comments, as well as suspend users' accounts, solely at the discretion of site administrators. Since we try to err on the side of open debate, you may sometimes see comments which you believe strain the boundaries of our rules. Comments are the opinions of visitors, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of Stand Firm site administrators or Gri5th Media, LLC.