(Western NC) Bishop Porter Taylor offers some Thoughts on Yesterday at GC 2012

Back to work at 2:15. The Bishops dealt with a sensitive issue. Seven bishops–some retired or no longer Episcopalian–had signed a friendly brief for the court proceedings in Fort Worth to support the parishes who left The Episcopal Church and are trying to keep their property. Because much of our conversation was private, I can only report that we had a unanimous roll call vote to support the Episcopal parishes, the right of the Episcopal bishops in the dioceses struggling with property disputes, and affirmation that the Episcopal bishops are the only rightful bishops in these dioceses. It was a hard but grace filled conversation.

Read it all.

print

Posted in * Anglican - Episcopal, --Aggressive Title IV Action Against Multiple Bishops on Eve of Gen. Con. 2012, --Gen. Con. 2012, Episcopal Church (TEC), General Convention, TEC Bishops, TEC Conflicts, TEC Conflicts: Fort Worth, TEC Conflicts: Quincy, TEC Polity & Canons

4 comments on “(Western NC) Bishop Porter Taylor offers some Thoughts on Yesterday at GC 2012

  1. c.r.seitz says:

    “Seven bishops–some retired or no longer Episcopalian–had signed a friendly brief for the court proceedings in Fort Worth to support the parishes who left The Episcopal Church and are trying to keep their property.”
    Got to love the way our Bishops major in facts and accuracy.

  2. SC blu cat lady says:

    Yep, we piskies never let facts and accurate understanding get in the way of making some ‘feel good’ resolution to absolve our consciences of any wrong doing. I suspect the private conversations in the HoB were not not as nice as the resolution. If only they had had live video streaming of those private conversations……

  3. Michael S. Mills says:

    It makes you wonder whether he actually read the amicus brief or the letter from the accused. And about whom could he be thinking of as a former Episcopalian?

  4. c.r.seitz says:

    Good luck trying to post a comment on his blog. What’s the point of having one when it is a one-way communication only?