Forward in Faith is appalled by TEC Primate Jefferts Schori’s intentional disinformation and abuse of Church Law in her attack upon Bishop William C. Wantland, a bishop of the Province of the Southern Cone, and Bishop Henry Scriven, a bishop of the Church of England. The actions of Jefferts Schori are an embarrassment to Christians and all of Anglicanism. Bishop Wantland specifically stated in his letter that he “did not renounce his orders.” Schori acknowledged in her letter that Bishop Wantland had transferred provinces, which clearly demonstrate her disregard for other provinces of the Anglican Communion and the canons of her own TEC denomination. Clearly her statements misrepresent Bishop Wantland’s letter. Bishop Wantland and Bishop Scriven have not renounced their orders, nor have they abandoned the Communion, but have affirmed their orders and the Communion.
FiF is appreciative of Bishop Wantland’s leadership and willingness to stand for biblical truth and the faith and order of the undivided Church as a member of FiF. FiF commends Bishop Scriven for his witness to biblical orthodoxy held by Anglicans throughout the world. We offer prayers of thanksgiving for Bishop Wantland and Bishop Scriven’s faithfulness and ask our Lord Jesus to continue to bless their ministries as bishops for the further spread of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.XJohn Fulham
Chairman
Forward in Faith International
Sooner or later, KJS is going to have to be stopped. Her actions have damaged TEC to the point where they are a laughingstock all over Christendom, and she is an embarrassment to the Anglican Communion. Her deliberate disregard for canon law, except when it suits her agenda, has brought ill repute upon her Church, and its bishops have chosen to go along with her actions and pronouncements to the point where they also have embarrassed their Church. If they want to salvage what is left of their Church, they are going to have to either tell her to back off, or they’ll have to bring a presentment against her.
#1… is that really true? I am questioning not your claim that she’s done really immoral things, but your claim that this will lead necessarily or even probably to TEC bishops bringing a presentment against her, a presentment which (I assume you mean) will have wide support in the HOB and HOD.
It seems like you are basing this on three premises:
(1) The actions of KJS have made her appear to the outside world like a terrible Christian leader — she is a public relations nightmare for TEC.
(2) The deputies and bishops of TEC deeply want to be respected by the rest of the Anglican Communion.
(3) The deputies and bishops of TEC deeply want to be respected by nonAnglican Christendom.
All three of those premises seem doubtful to me. I just can’t agree that (#1) KJS has been bad for the rep overall of TEC. On the whole I think she’s done more good than bad for its rep: TEC has effectively spun her as courageous, compassionate; and spun her opponents as haters of women and gay people; etc.
For a helpful side example, let’s look at Gene Robinson: there’s no doubt to people like us that his actions, starting in fall 2002, have done tremendous harm to TEC, to the Anglican communion, to our rep with the bulk of Chistendom etc. But note the result: his career has skyrocketed, and he is now officiating at the inauguration of the most powerful man on the planet. Far from being a liability, his actions have on the whole been GREAT for his rep, career, and power.
As for #2 and #3, I think the last two General Conventions have made it quite clear that we don’t care at all about our rep amongst the rest of the AC or among the vast bulk of nonAnglican Christendom. We made VGR a bishop, and later elected KJS, precisely BECAUSE we don’t care what Rome or the Orthodox think (or the Southern Baptists or the Missouri Synod Lutherans or…).
So I wish I could share your belief that, sooner or later, KJS is going to have to be stopped. That would be nice, but I seriously doubt it will happen. It would happen if she literally hired the Mafia to break Wantland’s kneecaps, but aside from that I doubt it. One of the reasons is that the very people you wish to discipline her are complicit in her unethical activities; to discipline her now they’d have to admit that they were equally wicked in their prior votes supporting her actions.
There are not enough bishops left in TEC with ….. to oppose Mrs. Shori
I said she [b] be stopped; not that she would [/b]. And I agree with you about the complicity of those who should do the stopping…..they’re every bit as bad as [she] is.
Ooops! Excuse my bold!
{Formatting fixed – Elf]
Oh… ok. Yeah, I agree that she should be stopped — in the sense that that would be the ethical thing for the bishops and deputies to do. But then again I thought that from the moment she preached her Mother Jesus sermon (i.e. within a few days of GC 2006).
I mistakenly thought you were saying that her recent actions had become so outrageous that it was now likely (or at least very possible) that she WOULD be stopped. Sorry for the misunderstanding.
Rest assured, in his time God will raise up a Jehu to deal with this.
One hopes the Anglican Primates might have something to say to her about this next week. Whether they [i]will[/i] is another matter.
Lying and deviousness have been deeply ingrained in the institution formerly known as ECUSA since the Ed Browning era. Mrs. Schori has raised the practice to a new standard.
It’s a fine art!