Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori has released a letter to Bishop Jack Leo Iker in which she writes that a step to withdraw the Diocese of Fort Worth from the The Episcopal Church would force her to take action to bring the diocese and its leadership into line with the mandates of the national Church. The letter is similar to one sent to Bishop Robert Duncan of Pittsburgh on October 31. Episcopal News Service reports that letters to other bishops will follow.
Nice little diocese you got here, Jack. Shame if something happened to it …
More of the same (see comments on same essential letter sent to Bp. Duncan).
I am pleased but sometimes wonder that there are no murmurings of discontent in the revistionists’ side with “leadership skills†of KJS. Her ability to shrink church rosters as measured by population adjusted membership numbers was second to none in Nevada. And now these letters. Are there none who question these letters which galvanize support from within the dioceses but also garner support internationally? Perhaps, they fear calamity if someone mentions the empress has no clothes?
Not that I am complaining. It is pleasantly amusing to hear Bruno wax lovingly about her “magnificent leadership skills.”
In reading that letter, one cannot fail but be struck by the extent to which the PB’s ecclesiology is profoundly incompatible with that recently expressed by the Archbishop of Canterbury.
So, we can complain to the Anglican Communion that we are bound by our polity and General Convention, but we can turn on a dime and threaten U.S. bishops who are not saying what 815 wants them to say at their diocesan conventions? Here, KJS tells Iker specifically what he must and must not do at the FW convention. Will canonical charges for failing to follow these instructions fly?
Wow, yeah…’cause the one to +Bob has done her so very much good.
Ms. Schori: “All these efforts, in my view, display a fundamental misunderstanding of the relationship between The Episcopal Church and its dioceses. ”
She writes this about the conventions in the dioceses, but, ironically enough, the exact same thing could be said about her stupid little letters.
What a walking disaster she is! And on so many levels!
“Reach out and touch
Somebody’s hand.
Make this world a better place
If you can.”
I find two statements appalling about this epistle.
[blockquote]… the interdependent and hierarchical relationship between the national Church and its dioceses and parishes … is at the heart of our mission, as expressed in our polity.[/blockquote]
Say what? I thought “the heart of our mission” was to proclaim the Gospel of Jesus Christ and his Kingdom.” I don’t recall Jesus ever having said diddly about “the interdependent and hierarchical relationship between the national Church and its dioceses and parishes.” Is there something missing from my Bible? Would even the Jesus Seminar vote that this sounds remotely like the real Jesus?
And then there is
[blockquote]Your servant in Christ.[/blockquote]
When ever did a servant address the one served in such a manner?
“You! Sheep! Get back to the flock or it will be lamb stew tonight!”
What is it with this woman and her threats? Is that the way she sees a shepherd pastoring her flock? Are you sure we can’t force a ‘no-confidence’ vote?
This is “form letter” stuff. Probably wise for her not to try to personalize it for either “Bob” or “Jack”, since there is every probability that personalizing would redound to even more negative reaction to Ms. Schori’s leadership than if she keeps it “business like”
This is required warning material…that’ all. There is no pastoral relationship between Ms. Schori and Bishops Duncan or Iker. I’m hoping my bishop gives this the silence it so clearly deserves.
Remember? Cool Hand Luke? “What we have here is a failure to communicate”.
Nwlayman,
What we have here is someone who is a dreadful leader. Her lack of congregation leadership experience continues to shine forth. BUT, remember … the good people of TEC elected her. Unless something really screwy happens, folks usually get the kind of leadership they are seeking. Given her leadership behavior, what does this tell us about TEC’s voting membership?
Md Brian
I’m not sure what the present court score is but I do remember that the TEC PB has lost significant court battles. I will continue to periodically ask “..what is the source of the money for her court ventures??”
Maybe [i]she[/i] just doesn’t understand [i]their[/i] polity…
Stuart Smith (#11) said,
“This is “form letter†stuff.”
No Stuart it is not “form letter stuff.”
Anyone who has worked at the executive level in direct personal support of executives ‘knows’ that before any public communication regarding policy matters, there is a professional requirement for “Personal to” and other “back channel” communication.
If Ms Schori does not practice this and/or does not have a supporting/advisory personal staff that practices this, then she and her staff are exhibiting a high level of naivete and or inexperience in their leadership of ECUSA.
But, maybe she and her staff are exhibiting a radical-progressive-revisionist revolutionary disregard for Anglican polity.