I also am one of those whose heart was warmed to read that particular blockbuster paragraph by the judge—the entire post is great.
But what was most gratifying was his calling out the Episcopal Church—meaning most especially the Presiding Bishop and her chancellor—for what in essence was a lie. Not just any ol’ white lie, mind you, but a bold, deliberate, calculated lie—and one that insultingly assumed the judge was too stupid or too weak or both to identify it as such.
The lie, of course, was that despite massive departures from the Episcopal Church, and parishes and dioceses leaving, and the Episcopal Church effectively declared out of communion with many of the world’s Anglicans, that there was no “division.” A division, the Episcopal Church asserted with stunning hubris, could only exist if they said it existed—therefore it didn’t exist. The judge begged to differ. He found the case overwhelming that there was in fact a division, and even quoted the use of the word division by the plaintiffs back at them (citing Bishop Lee’s words as but one example).
Of course the judge was too polite to use the L-word. Instead he said “it blinks at reality to characterize the ongoing division within the Diocese, ECUSA, and the Anglican Communion as anything but a division of the first magnitude.”
“Blinking at reality” is perhaps the best expression that anyone’s used to describe the mendacity of Episcopal Church leaders. First, it confirms there is a reality that exists—not just some pluriform truth that is nothing more than a function of clever word use and dictated perception by whomever is in power.