It needs to be understood, however, that Paragraph Two is procedural only. It does not alter the legal or ecclesiastical principles surrounding the questions of whether a parish can disaffiliate from the diocese or whether a disaffiliating congregation may retain parish property.
To everyone in parishes where members have separated from the Episcopal Church, we say that despite our different views, we sincerely invite you to be reconciled with us and return to active participation in the diocese, so that no disputes over property are necessary. We pledge to you that we do not seek to punish but rather only to be reconciled with you. In our work together over the past year, we have learned that we have widely different opinions on many of the issues facing the Episcopal Church today; we have also learned that if we refuse to allow those differences to harden into divisions, many fruitful things can be accomplished.
Some media reports have incorrectly suggested that we will now begin simply to transfer buildings and land to parishes that do not want to be active in the Episcopal Church. Our fiduciary duties as trustees and stewards, as well as the terms of the Stipulation, do not permit that to be the case.
But it remains our desire, within the constraints of the Stipulation and the canons and legal principles which govern our stewardship of these matters, to find a means to use these sacred spaces to the greatest glory of God.
In saying:
the Standing Committee shows itself to be dishonest and deceptive. Paragraph Two is exactly about having a mechanism for parishes to leave, without the sophistry of “legal or ecclesiastical principles” used to such non-Christian effect in the rest of ECUSA.
Shame, shame, shame on these people, especially the leader of the Standing Committee who continues to allow himself to be used as a shill for 815.
It is nice to know in advance that TEC Pittsburgh will be taking the usual KJS/DBB approved course and will attempt to seize all the properties of the departing parishes and evict the congregations. I guess things aren’t different in Pittsburgh after all… Given this threat, which is how I would characterize this obnoxious letter (return to TEC, we really love you and won’t “punish” you- or else we’ll sue to get your property), I would definitely endorse appealing Judge James ruling and dragging out the appeal process as long as possible. Make them burn through the entire $15 million to get their Pyrrhric victory..
Phil, I too am stunned by the brazen brushing aside of the mechanism outlined in the Stipulation. It is clear that there will be no good faith effort to negotiate or mediate these property disputes but that in fact the TEC diocese intends to sue for these properties. But as I said, it is nice of them to announce their plans in advance so publicly. At least this way no one is taken in by their kind words and can prepare appropriately.
I agree with you, Nevin. And, by the way, if you want to see how the new regime really means to “prosecute” things going forward, go to Lionel Deimel’s blog. His tone makes it quite clear that everybody might as well start hiring attorneys right now.
It puts the prior day’s story about priestly orders in perspective, doesn’t it? My advice to any clergy taking that deal would be to read the document over and over, have your lawyer read it over and over and have it examined for sections written in invisible ink. Better yet, let them pretend to depose you – they are unlikely, at this point, to constitute a church with any authority to do so, anyway.
Disgraceful.
TEC is a Church (sort of) with a dim future. A lot of folks are merely trying to live our the balance of their lives and/or finish their careers. They are playing hard ball because they have very little other choice in order to achieve their largely personal goals. The other group is hard core left wing militants. Leftists are usually parasites and they need a host. If the host gets clear they will wither and die. At least the ACNA diocese has hope for the future -with or without the current property which can in the end be replaced.
I have have worked along side 6 of the 8 members of the TEC Diocese Standing Committee and I am simply astounded that they would put their name to such a document. Shame, shame, shame. These are not the same people that I knew.
Between this and the duplicious self-serving letter I received earlier in the week concerning my “renouncing” my Holy Orders, I realize we will not acheive a peaceful and graceful resolution in Pittsburgh. We had a chance to effect a new way forward but I think it will soon have passed.
This is not surprising, but it is deeply disappointing.
It has passed, David. It passed the day the day they enthusiastically embraced and became partner to the lawsuit against the diocese. Their word carries as much integrity as the word of Mrs. Schori and her Chancellor.
This would have been such a wonderful opportunity for Pitt-TEC to show us who have lost in the current ordeal some real grace. One Pitt-TEC priest said that the Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh (TEC) had a ‘Gospel and moral responsibility’ to steward (our) assets that the court seems to have awarded them. I almost can’t believe that someone could link the aquisition of someone elses property with the Gospel of God’s Grace in Christ (no matter where you stand on the current issue, such a linking is really disturbing). This whole situation makes me terribly sad. I’m praying for the Pitt-TEC leaders, asking that God will enable them to fully live up to their new slogan, “Moving foward in Grace.” We’ll see.
Another puppet diocese. Since the diocese owes its creation to 815, 815 calls the shots and 815 puts its words in the mouths of the standing committee. If Bp. Lee of Virginia could not hold onto his integrity in the face of the demands of 815, how much can we expect of these folk who owe their positions to 815? Past friendship will mean nothing here; expect nothing but the company line.
#2 and following
The whole “Let us be reconciled” line reminds me of that awful movie Mars Attacks! from the 1990s. “We come in peace!” ZAP!
Since the TEC Diocese is so principled and grace-filled in all their dealings (but of course within the Stipulation blah, blah) I would like to propose to them what I call the “transgendered marriage†principle.
Let me explain how it works. A couple years ago, I was talking to a priest from Pittsburgh who was lamenting the fact that there was really no place for him in the TEC leadership because he was a normally and happily married husband of one wife. I said to him, “Here’s what you do. You and your wife both declare yourselves to be transgendered. Then you can stay married and at the same time qualify for all sorts of special positions in the Church. In fact, you and your wife may get a “twofer†appointment to various representative bodies.†That’s the transgendered marriage principle.
Now here’s how it works at the ecclesiastical level in Pittsburgh. I’m thinking of my home parish, St. Stephen’s in Sewickley. So the TEC diocese graciously takes over the church on behalf of the three loyal Episcopalians who are rustled up. Of course, the TEC diocese cannot pay the electric bills from these three loyal Episcopalians’ tithes, so they’re going to have to sell the church. But to whom? Following the Schori Guideline for Gracious Selling of Church Property, they can sell it to anyone but an ACNA church. Now Christ Church Grove Farm is not an ACNA church. So following the transgendered marriage principle, the TEC Diocese sells St. Stephen’s to CCGF for one dollar (hence getting out of those pesky electric bills), and CCGF sells its facility to St. Stephen’s for one dollar.
Voila, everyone is happy and TEC Pittsburgh has two dollars to contribute to charitable purposes – as distinguished from the rest of the budget that goes into lawsuits.
(Disclaimer: I have seen satirical proposals that are taken to be for real, because of the unreality of much that passes for “grace-filled†today. Please note that this post is satirical.)
Stephen Noll
Author of [url=http://www.stephenswitness.org/2007/07/its-property-stupid.html]“It’s the Property, Stupidâ€[/url]
Sequel – The Trans-transgendered marriage principle.
The nice thing about gender is that it is all in the mind, not in the genes or hormones. So when the transgendered marriage becomes no longer a marriage of convenience, the couple can by telling their simple story revert to their original orientation. So as soon as my priest friend in Pittsburgh cuts free of TEC (in fact, he has), he can return be being the red-blooded husband of one wife.
It could work that way for the churches too. Once St. Stephen’s is sold to CCGF and vice versa, voila, the two can swap back their properties without any interference from that grace-filled entity aligned with TEC.
End of Satire
In truth, I write this in anger and grief for former students, colleagues and friends in Pittsburgh who have signed on to this travesty. Whatever claim to legitimacy you have had so far is now shredded. Repent and get free of the incubus which is TEC before it sucks your soul dry.
Stephen Noll
Senior Priest of the Diocese of Pittsburgh
One free pass to the Laffin’ Place for Stephen Noll.
As my friend Peter Frank (former real Pittsburgh Diocese spokesperson) has said more than once: “You can’t sue someone into reconciliation.”
I know that we have friends in the TEC Diocese of Pittsburgh, I’m just not sure how much influence they have, especially when KJS wouldn’t be very happy with them showing mercy. I’ll pray that they have courage to do the gracious thing. Now [i]THAT[/i] would be a testimony to the power of the Gospel!
“We pledge to you that we do not seek to punish but rather only to be reconciled with you.” Psychologists are fond of reminding us that the best predictor of future behavior is past behavior. Given the “reconciling” behavior and lies spoken by the Schori diocese in the past 14 months, the pledge is a bald-faced lie and should be regarded as such.
After some reflection I would like to temper my first post and say that the only good reason to appeal would be upon the recommendation of counsel. While depleting the assets of the TEC diocese might be a noble goal, the fact remains that with no financial resources Bishop Duncan may not be in a position to drag out the appeals process. Cooler heads should prevail.
What really got under my skin, and caused me to refer to this press release as “obnoxiousâ€, was not actually the announcement that they were going after the individual parishes but the insulting assumptions present in the text. I refer to the assumption that those who have left will now be returning because of the loss of endowments and the threatened loss of property. This assumption showed up in their first press release where Jim Simons linked the judge’s ruling and “welcoming back†those who left. It comes through even stronger in this press release where, after a stern warning that TEC will be coming after their parishes, those who left are “invited†to “returnâ€. This reveals a very shallow understanding of why those who left felt the need to do so. Perhaps Jim Simons has been influenced by the opinions of his fellow elected diocesan official Lionel Deimel who posted on his blog that “property lawsuits might (encourage their return)â€.
And that leads to an observation: it is now simply impossible to separate those who speak nice words from their partners who speak with venom. When the actions of TEC Pittsburgh mirror the suggested actions of those who urge that TEC be “less generous†and revel in the prospect of seeing people evicted from their churches, how are those speaking of reconciliation to be taken at face value?
It really is an astounding — and continuing — misread of the people who are leaving TEC. As I’ve said so many many many times before, people who are leaving TEC have no desire to be a part of a corrupt and heretical denomination. No amount of “see how nicely we’re all getting along” stuff is going to make them slap their forehead and say “dang — I must return now.” Not to mention the incredibly naive notion that suing them for their property will cause “reconciliation.”
The “differences” are in fact “divisions.” Indeed — I myself as a continuing member of TEC are “divided” from the heretics in the Diocese of Pittsburgh [TEC] and certainly repulsed by the spiteful [as distinguished from the few adult] erstwhile “conservatives” who tell people “don’t google the name of our interim bishop”.
I am no more “reconciled” with the revisionist Episcopalians in the TEC diocese [sic] than I am “reconciled” with various Buddhists and Hindus out there in the wide world. Actually . . . I *am* quite reconciled with the latter, as they’re not purporting to be Christians while engaging in savage petty childish behavior such as we are seeing in Pittsburgh.
What a sordid and despicable use of the word “reconcile.” Like an abusive spouse using that word with his wife, all the while holding the belt.
[blockquote]to the assumption that those who have left will now be returning because of the loss of endowments and the threatened loss of property[/blockquote]
Someone has pointed out that those folks really don’t want what they seem to be asking for.
Assume the “departees” return. The TEC majorities once again become the minorities. The “returnees” elect vestries and send folks to the convention, where the “returnees” become the majority and elect standing committees and a bishop. And so, the TEC affiliated crowd are back to where they were two years ago. Only now the “returnees” are madder than hell.