A January 26 gathering of continuing Episcopalians in the Diocese of San Joaquin and national church leaders, “Moving Forward, Welcoming All,” will focus on reconciliation, inclusion, and celebration, event organizers said.
“We are just so encouraged; we’re looking forward to welcoming more people,” said Cindy Smith, president of Remain Episcopal, a group which opposed the December vote to realign the Central California Valley diocese with the Argentina-based Province of the Southern Cone, which has about 22,000 members and encompasses the South American nations of Argentina, Bolivia, Chile, Paraguay, Peru and Uruguay.
Former Bishop John-David Schofield had urged the realignment, approved by 42 of the diocese’s 47 congregations. Clergy approved the split 70-12 and laity voted 103-10 for realignment.
But in recent weeks, momentum and enthusiasm have spiked as additional people and some congregations “have thought about what has happened, what it means to not be part of the Episcopal Church anymore” and sought out continuing communities of faith, said Smith.
Kendall, could you please label ENS stories as such so that I can have my BS meter on before I begin reading TitusOneNine.
I’ll bet that the “continuing” Episcopalians’ “Big Tent” won’t have to be very big.
#1, I turned on my meter as soon as I read “[i]former bishop[/i] Schofield.” ENS is not subtle.
After 15 months of being under the leadership of the Southern Cone, I can attest those with any concerns can rest at ease.
Remain Episcopal: Go in peace.
re #5: And don’t let the door…?
Sorry, couldn’t resist.
Good catch, Sue, it must be these new glasses!
Yes, Tony, I got rid of the rose-colored ones.
First, whenever a news statement says “momentum is building” and such several times, you can be sure a) they wish it were and b) it ain’t. This is an effort to cheer on the remaining Episcopalians. So, too, will be an absolutely packed meeting on the 26th. Yep, it will be packed: they will bus ’em in if they have to, but it will be standing room only. By Episcopal Church standards, it will be huge. Of course the bulk of folks won’t be Episcopalians from the San Joaquin area, and those who are will be the sort that were either not particularly involved in the church before or have only a sentimental attachment to the Episcopal Church. They’ll put on an effort worthy of Chicago precinct captains to get the folks there. But when it’s over, there won’t be much there there, and anyone with sense will realize the “living into the Baptismal Covenant” of Bonnie Anderson and the “listening tour” has no traction. This is a prelude to litigation, to proving that the “real” church is still there. It’s a farce, a Potemkin village, an irrelevancy. And they know it.
(+)JDS has been inhibited. See the news at a site across the aisle.
PadreWayne
Next step: declaration of vacancy for the TEC See of San Joaquin (doesn’t there have to be a trial first?). Then the PB can appoint an interim bishop (presumably TEC will pay his salary?). Then the three parishes in the “diocese” can elect a new bishop (and how will the 3 parishes pay [i]his[/i] salary?).
VaAnglican – How do you know all that?
10, it was to be expected.
Why would there be a bishop for maybe 5 congregations and maybe 500 people? Shouldn’t they be incorporated into a neighboring diocese?
[blockquote](+)JDS has been inhibited. See the news at a site across the aisle. [/blockquote]
Didn’t +JDS already inhibit TEC last month? Kinda like George III revoking my namesake’s English citizenship on 7/5/1776.
As long as we’re at this, can we get ++Akinola or ++Kolini to inhibit Bruno, Andrus and Chane?
Wow. Pravda has nothing on ENS!
#17, most of the writers over at ENS are moonlighting from their day jobs at the North Korean News Service.
ENS has taken out the word “former” from Bishop Schofield’s title, as of 9:50 EST Saturday. I would urge you all to read the posts on Stand Firm.
It doesn’t matter one whit what TEC and KJS do or claim. Bp. Schofield has chosen this day whom he will serve.
Well, NancyNH, no matter how ENS chooses to cite JDS, he, by his actions, is the former Episcopal Bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin. By his actions.
[blockquote]he, by his actions, is the former Episcopal Bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin[/blockquote]
Incorrect, JDS is the current bishop of the formerly Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin, now (currently) a Diocese of the Southern Cone. There is (currently) no Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin of which JDS could be the former bishop. Maybe TEC will decide to start a new one. With three parishes.
I have reconsidered this somewhat. To be fair, there were three parishes (and a couple of missions, I think) that had a majority in favor of remaining TEC. There were 42 congregations (parishes, I think) that had a majority in favor of departing for the Southern Cone. There were, no doubt, dissenters in most or all of those 42 congregations.
With that as the backdrop, there is no reason why those dissenters cannot band together to form their own parish(es). Better yet would be form those dissenters to join with and prop up the two non-self-supporting missions. That would make 5 parishes. It is written somewhere, I believe, that 5 parishes a diocese doth make.
So I withdraw and apologize for my sarcasm about 3 parishes paying the salary of a new Bishop. The newly forming TEC Diocese, whatever they choose to name it, does have a chance at financial viability. It will be but a shadow of the Southern Cone Diocese of San Joaquin, but it has a chance at an independent life nonetheless.
[size=1][u][url=http://resurrectiongulfcoast.blogspot.com/](a refugee from the Briar Patch)[/url][/u][/size],
Coming on late, here. Isn’t the celebration of Father Mark Lawrence being made a bishop also on January 26?!!
And another thing while I’m ait it! When did someone reprt all the congregations in the diocese voting?? My take on convention was these were deputies voting! Does thait equal a congregation’s vote now?!!