++Schori Writes to ++Schofield

[angli_fan]

[Episcopal News Service] Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori -- concerned by current affairs in the Fresno-based Diocese of San Joaquin, California -- has written to its bishop, the Rt. Rev. John-David Schofield. The diocese, which is scheduled to meet in convention December 1-2, includes an estimated 10,000 Episcopalians in some 48 congregations. The text of Jefferts Schori's November 20 letter follows.

November 20, 2006

The Rt. Rev. John-David Schofield
Diocese of San Joaquin
4159 E. Dakota Avenue
Fresno, California 93726

My dear brother:

I have seen reports of your letter to parishes in the Diocese of San Joaquin, which apparently urges delegates to your upcoming Diocesan Convention to take action to leave the Episcopal Church. I would ask you to confirm the accuracy of those reports. If true, you must be aware that such action would likely be seen as a violation of your ordination vows to "uphold the doctrine, discipline, and worship of Christ as this Church has received them." I must strongly urge you to consider the consequences of such action, not only for yourself but especially for all of the Episcopalians under your pastoral charge and care.

I certainly understand that you personally disagree with decisions by General Conventions over the past 30 and more years. You have, however, taken vows three times over that period to uphold the "doctrine, discipline, and worship of the Episcopal Church." If you now feel that you can no longer do so, the more honorable course would be to renounce your orders in this Church and seek a home elsewhere. Your public assertion that your duty is to violate those vows puts many, many people at hazard of profound spiritual violence. I urge you, as a pastor, to consider that hazard with the utmost gravity.

As you contemplate this action I would also remind you of the trust which you and I both hold for those who have come before and those who will come after us. None of us has received the property held by the Church today to use as we will. We have received it as stewards, for those who enjoy it today and those who will be blessed by the ministry its use will permit in the future. Our forebears did not build churches or give memorials with the intent that they be removed from the Episcopal Church. Nor did our forebears give liberally to fund endowments with the intent that they be consumed by litigation.

The Church will endure whatever decision you make in San Joaquin. The people who are its members, however, will suffer in the midst of this conflict, and probably suffer unnecessarily. Jesus calls us to take up our crosses daily, but not in the service of division and antagonism. He calls us to take up our crosses in his service of reconciling the world to God. Would that you might lead the people of San Joaquin toward decisions that build up the Body, that bring abundant life to those within and beyond our Church, that restore us to oneness.

I stand ready for conversation and reconciliation. May God bless your deliberation.

I remain

Your servant in Christ,

+Katharine

The Most Rev. Katharine Jefferts Schori
Presiding Bishop and Primate

www.dfms.org/3577_79844_ENG_HTM.htm

[srigdon]

I think Schofield is only supposed to have one plus sign next to his name.

But, in the letter, Katherine signs as "+Katherine". I thought presiding bishops/archbishops get two pluses. Is the latter something that's not really done in practice?

Anyway, this is pretty unimportant, but just thought I'd mention...thanks angli_fan...(or should I write that ++angli_fan?)

[srigdon]

Having just been promoted to Lay Reader, I confess my error. That should be ******angli_fan, and I am now **srigdon.

;D

[alan1803]

srigdon said:

I think Schofield is only supposed to have one plus sign next to his name.

But, in the letter, Katherine signs as "+Katherine". I thought presiding bishops/archbishops get two pluses. Is the latter something that's not really done in practice?

If a prelate signs with a cross, it's only one cross, up to and including +Benedictus PP XVI, Episcopus, Servus Servorum Dei

In the C of E it has historically been a "high church" practice, but has become moer common recently.

[fyffee]

I am really surprised that in the comment on such a critical letter at this time of turmoil in the Communion, that the focus of comments is on the extremely trivial matter of whether Bp Schofield ought to referenced with one + or 2 ++'s. It seems to me that Schori's letter is very heavy handed, shows no sign of God's grace, is heavily focussed on property issues, uses the idea of the doctrine of the ECUSA to be whatever the flavour of the moment to be, has no reference to any Biblical principles, fails to recognise that Bp Schofield is a bishop in the worldwide Anglican Communion, and as such he is in full accord with its Biblical doctrines and traditions, and she seems to think that the doctrine and practices of ECUSA determined by its General Conventions are the sole standard by which canonical obedience is to be measured. I'm surprised that Schori did not include any reference to the UN's Millenium Development Goals, since this seems to be ECUSA's gospel and mission focus. How should Schofield respond to such a provocative letter, apart from disowning the reference to himself with 2 ++'s?

[srigdon]

I'm sorry you didn't find the gallows humor amusing.

Personally, I am weary after all these years of fighting and don't have all that much energy left. We've done plenty of substantive discussion on this board and will continue to do so.

As I don't particularly care for either of these bishops, I find it hard to take sides with either of them.

Welcome aboard.

[anglicansablaze]

Presiding Bishop Jeffert Schori's letter is not unexpected, having extracted a promise from Archbishop Williams in her meeting with him that he would not intervene. Her chancellor also sent out ominous letters to a number of diocese. The Presiding Bishop has for her own reasons singled out Bishop Schofield as a leading opponent of the liberal-revisionist wing of the Episcopal Church and is intent upon making a example of him. I suspect that she is hoping to cow the conservative-orthodox wing of the Episcopal Church. The Presiding Bishop signaled her intent when her response to the conservative-orthodox bishops's reaction to the 2006 General Convention was "Get over it!" It was clear from the get-go that she has no sympathy toward those who dissent from the actions of the 2003 and 2006 General Conventions. The conservative-orthodox wing of the Episcopal Church is not deceived by a purported holding out of an olive branch. Just like DEPO anything that the liberal-revisionist bishops of the Episcopal Church put forward is going to be totally inadequate and unacceptable to the conservative-orthodox wing and is just so much posturing. "Look, we offered them a compromise. They didn't accept it. Consequently, we feel justified in getting tough." I see a striking similarity between the liberal-revisionist bishops and the Bush Administration in the days leading up to the Iraq War. Bush was looking for a reason to send in the troops. The Presiding Bishop and the Episcopal Church's liberal-revisionist leaders are looking for an excuse to crack down on conservative-orthodox Episcopalians and their leaders. They are quite capable of manufacturing one. ;D