Associated Press – December 6, 2007
FRESNO, California – Headed into a critical vote, an Episcopal diocese in central California is poised to split with the national denomination over what its bishop sees as the threat of moral decay.
The Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin is expected to vote by Saturday to secede from the U.S. church, becoming the first full diocese to do so because of a conservative-liberal rift that began decades ago and is now focused on whether the Bible condemns gay relationships.
An affirmative vote would place San Joaquin under the leadership of a like-minded, conservative Anglican diocese in Argentina. It is almost certain to spark a court fight over control of the diocese’s multimillion-dollar real estate holdings and other assets.
In a letter to parishioners, Bishop John-David Schofield said “those who claim they want to remain Episcopalians but reject the biblical standards of morality … will – in the end – be left solely with a name and a bureaucratic structure.”
The head of the U.S. denomination has warned Schofield against secession.
“I do not need to remind you as well of the potential consequences of the direction in which you appear to be leading the Diocese of San Joaquin,” Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori, head of the U.S. denomination, wrote in a letter Monday to him. “I do not intend to threaten you, only to urge you to reconsider and draw back from this trajectory.”
Schofield responded that the diocese would go forward with the vote during its annual convention, which starts Friday. He all but predicted that delegates would choose to break with the Episcopal Church, the U.S. member of the global Anglican Communion.
“It is The Episcopal Church that has isolated itself from the overwhelming majority of Christendom and more specifically from the Anglican Communion by denying Biblical truth and walking apart from the historic Faith and Order,” Schofield wrote.
Last year, a majority of the lay people and clergy who attended the diocesan convention voted to take the first step to secede from the national church. That proposal would become final if it receives a two-thirds majority vote at the meeting.
The Fresno-based congregation has explored breaking ties with the American church since 2003, when Episcopalians consecrated the church’s first openly gay bishop, V. Gene Robinson of New Hampshire. The resulting uproar throughout the world Anglican fellowship has moved the 77-million-member communion toward the brink of schism.
Christian advocates for accepting gay relationships, including Jefferts Schori, say they are guided by biblical teachings on social justice and tolerance. But Schofield and other conservatives believe Scripture bars same-sex relationships. San Joaquin also is one of three dioceses in the Episcopal Church that will not ordain women. Jefferts Schori last year became the first woman elected to lead the denomination.
The diocese’s holdings include 48 church buildings, including the lush Fresno headquarters, a series of mission-style buildings surrounded by olive, Chinese elm and cherry trees. Its total assets are worth millions, said the Rev. Van McCalister, a diocesan spokesman.
About 55 conservative Episcopal parishes have split from the church in the last few years and some have affiliated directly with Anglican provinces overseas, according to national church statistics. But the courts have mostly ruled against them, said Valerie Munson, a Minneapolis-based lawyer who specializes in religion and law.
“If the San Joaquin diocese succeeds in taking its property, it would set a precedent that would affect not only the Episcopal Church but other churches that are similarly organized,” Munson said. “It could set off a chain reaction.”
San Joaquin is one of four Episcopal dioceses out of 110 – along with Fort Worth, Texas; Quincy , Illinois, and Pittsburgh – taking steps toward breaking with the U.S. church.
“Who owns what is ultimately going to be controlled by the civil courts,” said James Quillinan, a San Jose-based estate and probate attorney. “What’s certain is that when local chapters break off from the national group, it almost always results in litigation.”
Copyright 2007 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Beliefnet
Advertisement
posted December 7, 2007 at 4:22 pm
Well, the world is ending. And, people said that there was nothing wrong with gays in the church and gay marriage. Now see what is happening!
posted December 7, 2007 at 4:34 pm
Just kidding!
As a Episcopalian, I am saddened that some of my brotheren are still ardent supporters of prejudice, discrimination, and bigotry.
This diocese still has no female clergy…..the rest of our denomination dealt with that issue years ago.
If this group does not wish to be a part of the Episcopal Church then I wish them the best of luck. However, they do not have a right to take our toys (real estate and property) with them.
Peace!
posted December 7, 2007 at 4:39 pm
It seems that the very conservative group will be better off not staying with the U.S. Episcopal church. Good grief! They don’t even ordain women…which is a lot backward (what? they think they are the RCC?) and why would their Bible (which I suspect is the same as the one used by the U.S. Church) allow anyone but heterosexuals to be married? It will be interesting to see what happens with their real estate, however. Who does it belong to? Guess they will enjoy their relationship with the diocese in Argentina???? Do they have to learn Spanish?
posted December 7, 2007 at 5:57 pm
They have voted with their mental feet for Argentina. I guess Uganda didn’t appeal to them, or at least not enough.
I too hope the good guys and gals get to keep the bling and the bigots (and let’s face it, this Bible interpretation can obviously go either way, based on how you choose to interpret things) get only their theology.
posted December 7, 2007 at 11:27 pm
JohnQ wrote:
As a Episcopalian, I am saddened that some of my brotheren are still ardent supporters of prejudice, discrimination, and bigotry.
Dear JohnQ:
What is prejudiced, discriminatory or bigoted about supporting what is clearly God’s perfect will for healthy sexuality, that being heterosexual sex within the confinds of marriage? God wants the best for us, and sodomy between two men just was not meant to be. There are moral absolutes which our creator give us to protect us.
I do think Christians are wrong to say homosexuality is a “choice.” But the homosexual community is wrong to say homosexuality is “genetic.” It’s neither. Homosexuality is a deception, a lie. It’s a false identity of the flesh. Flesh doesn’t mean skin, but rather is the individual living a “self-life,” vs. the “Christ-life,” which is Christ living His life through us.
Christ can restore someone’s sexual identity to where He intended it to be. I know that’s true, because a friend of mine was delivered from the bondage of homosexuality.
Well, now I’ll wait for the Christian bashers to call me a homophobe.
MV
posted December 8, 2007 at 2:23 am
This diocese seems very traditional. I hope they get to keep their property and that the corrupt national church doesn’t sue them in civil courts for it. The national church really does not have a lot to its understanding of the Bible. Especially with ordaining women, gay marriage, law suits. It’s a shame this batch isn’t converting to the Catholic Church.
posted December 8, 2007 at 5:18 am
“What is prejudiced, discriminatory or bigoted about supporting what is clearly God’s perfect will for healthy sexuality, that being heterosexual sex within the confinds of marriage?”
If that’s the case where are the people leaving churches that don’t cast out all who ever engage in sex of any kind outside of marriage?
But in fact it would be foolish to use a book written multiple thousands of years ago to guide our morality now. I don’t pretend to know how the more modern Episcopalians reached their decision but I know it’s a more sensible approach. The conservative Fresnans are fighting a losing battle for bigotry and it will be a good thing if they are tossed out on the street. Then we’ll see how sturdy their beliefs are. Maybe the Argentineans will help them out.
posted December 8, 2007 at 9:43 am
nnmns-
“I don’t pretend to know how the more modern Episcopalians reached their decision but I know it’s a more sensible approach.”
It has been through prayer, Bible study, and discernment. The message of Christ was one of compassion. Episcopalians (for the most part) are focusing more on the social justice message of Christ than the message of Paul and the OT which had to do with cultural mores of the times (1700-5000 years ago).
There are ~110 dioceses that make up the TEC and Fresno is one of the 4 that is talking about…or, taking steps towards leaving the TEC.
The vast majority of Episcopalians support female equality….and, female clergy. The vast majority of Episcopalians support equal-rights for all people…including lgbt people.
Peace!
posted December 8, 2007 at 9:45 am
adamlsp-
“This diocese seems very traditional. I hope they get to keep their property and that the corrupt national church doesn’t sue them in civil courts for it. The national church really does not have a lot to its understanding of the Bible. Especially with ordaining women, gay marriage, law suits. It’s a shame this batch isn’t converting to the Catholic Church.
posted December 8, 2007 at 9:52 am
adamlsp-
“I hope they get to keep their property and that the corrupt national church doesn’t sue them in civil courts for it. The national church really does not have a lot to its understanding of the Bible. Especially with ordaining women, gay marriage, law suits. It’s a shame this batch isn’t converting to the Catholic Church.”
Errr, it is not “their” property….it belongs to the Episcopal Church….the church they seem to want to leave behind. Certianly it is there right to leave….but, it is not their right to take property that does not belong to them.
“Corrupt”? In what way? Our leaders are elected. There have to my knowledge not been any suggestions of unfair elections.
Actually, it would appear to me that our leadership has a very good understanding of the Bible…as evidenced by their direction our church has been going for the last 3-4 decades.
Oh, I don’t really think that the Catholic Church needs anymore prejudice-supportive Christians…..there are unfortunately so many there now.
Peace!
posted December 8, 2007 at 10:05 am
What is prejudiced, discriminatory or bigoted about supporting what is clearly God’s perfect will for healthy sexuality, that being heterosexual sex within the confinds of marriage? God wants the best for us, and sodomy between two men just was not meant to be. There are moral absolutes which our creator give us to protect us.
MV-
“What is prejudiced, discriminatory or bigoted about supporting what is clearly God’s perfect will for healthy sexuality, that being heterosexual sex within the confinds of marriage? God wants the best for us, and sodomy between two men just was not meant to be. There are moral absolutes which our creator give us to protect us.”
Where do you get this stuff? This article is speaking about a diocese leaving the church over their desire to maintain their prejudice, discrimination, and bigotry towards women and lgbt people. You seem to be more focused on sex. Why?
However, since you brought it up, sex is not mentioned in the Big Ten, Our Lord seemingly did not chastise any homosexuals for their relationships or their sexual acts….there are several places in the Bible where Our Lord does chastise heterosexuals.
Perhaps a romantic and/or sexual relationship is not the right thing for you…fine. However, what is perfect for you….may not be perfect for other people.
“I do think Christians are wrong to say homosexuality is a “choice.” But the homosexual community is wrong to say homosexuality is “genetic.” It’s neither. Homosexuality is a deception, a lie. It’s a false identity of the flesh. Flesh doesn’t mean skin, but rather is the individual living a “self-life,” vs. the “Christ-life,” which is Christ living His life through us.
”
Perhaps you should look towards science rather than your beliefs to understand this topic.
“Well, now I’ll wait for the Christian bashers to call me a homophobe.”
As a Christian, the only martyr I need is Christ. We are called upon to live our lives according to Our Lord’s teachings….not, attempt to emulate him by self-martyrdom.
One does not have to be a “Christian basher” to recognize homophobia.
Peace!
posted December 8, 2007 at 1:37 pm
Mark V:
JohnQ. has said a lot of what I might have said, especially the last line….Well said,John.
To add…to me it is a shame that some folks have such a narrow point of view of their religion. The Christians I know, and most of those on this site, are very open and loving folks…..with the realization that their God wants all His/Her children to be happy. They believe He/She created ALL of the His/Her children JUST THE WAY they are…GLBT. No mistakes. As for your friend who was “delivered from bondage” (ineresting definition)I hope that friend is truely happy…and not living a lie.
posted December 8, 2007 at 2:42 pm
While the Episcopal Church is not perfect (and I know of NO church that is) because ALL churches are products of humanity – the Episcopal Church is at the very least willing to take a look at what may seem to be an unpopular topic, pray about it in terms of scripture, traditon and reason – and come to a decision based on scripture, tradition and reason. Nothing in the Episcopal Church is done in a vaccuum. Through prayer, Gene Robinson was elected bishop: who are we to assume that WE (mere mortals that we are) know better than the Holy Spirit who answered said prayers…. through prayer we have come to recognize that the church (i.e. ALL churches) are failing in their call to compassion and love of ALL people not just necessarily those who we think are the unloveable, but ALL people regardless of their race, gender, creed or (gasp) sexual orientation.
I am myself am very saddened that Bishop Schoffield continues in the direction that he is heading. It was only at the end of last year that the dioceses of Northern California, California and El Camino attempted to file an ecclesastical censure against him, but was over ruled. They knew what he would attempt to do – and surely his trying. He and his followers may leave the Episcopal Church; but the property that currently holds parishes and missions does not belong to the individual parishes or missions, but rather it is held in trust to the national church.
There are consequences of leaving the national church: financial, i.e. loss of property, potentially professional consequences for the clergy – especially for the Bishop who could possibly be defrocked… I hope that they listen to the Holy Spirit, and not to their bishop for this is a VERY serious issue that sits before them.
posted December 8, 2007 at 3:44 pm
Well, the vote is in and they have voted to leave.
How unfortunate that they have made this choice. Prejudice, discrimination, and bigotry is also a choice. No one is called to be prejudiced, discriminatory, nor a bigot towards our brothers and sisters.
I wish them the best.
Peace!
posted December 8, 2007 at 4:28 pm
JohnQ -
Thanks for the update. I just went to ENS and read the full article. I’ll go the the Diocese’s website in a minute and see if anything’s up there yet.
Mr Vilen -
I am a Christian, but not a basher, so I’m not going to call you a homophobe, or any other bad name. There has been more than enough name-calling, and I’m not going to add to the hellish din by taking your bait. I am going to call you one who espouses a theological position which is exceedingly questionable, at best.
Meanwhile:
On the night before he died, Jesus “looked up to heaven and said, ‘Father, the hour has come; glorify your Son so that the Son may glorify you … As you have sent me into the world, so I have sent [the disciples] into the world. I ask not only on behalf of these, but also on behalf of those who will believe in me through their word, that they may all be one. As you, Father, are in me and I am in you, may they also be in us, so that the world may believe that you have sent me.’” (John 17:1, 18, 20-21, NRSV)
San Joaquin has chosen that they shall NOT be one, at least with me; that we who believe through the disciples’ work shall NOT be one; so that the world may NOT believe that he had sent him.
May God have mercy on them.
posted December 8, 2007 at 6:37 pm
Just heard that on the news, John. Now we’ll see what happens to the property. They may have to meet in a tent!
posted December 8, 2007 at 8:00 pm
Pagansister, A tent in the summer in Fresno! Hot, hot, hot!
posted December 8, 2007 at 10:17 pm
john q,and everyone else who thinks the Bible does not condemn homosexuality shoud read more carefully. mv is definitely on the right track here. you cant change the truth just because its out of style or not “politically correct”. you either follow the Bible or you dont. Even Jesus had no use for the “double-minded man”. i applaud this diocese and their decision to leave. you must take a stand somewhere,and standing for the truth is not a bad place to start! God bless you all
posted December 9, 2007 at 12:07 am
This is surely heading to the civil courts. I doubt that the denomination and the diocese will be able to work out an amiable divorce, and they will haggle over the property for sure. A very wise person once said, “once it gets to the civil court a church [or diocese] may have won the battle but they have lost the war”.
Once the bishop of San Jauguin retires or leaves in some other fashion, they will still have this mess to deal with. Anyone who cannot get along with their national church family will surely have greater issues with a blended international Church family. Are they willing to not only build new facilities, but also ferry the archbishop of Argentina northward – or their bishop southward for all the denominational folderol? Not likely.
Perhaps we are heading to another 1/2 millenia of schisms – it happened at 1000 and 1500, so why not now? You would think that after 2000 years we might have found a way to work things out better. Further proof that history may not repeat itself, but it often rhymes.
posted December 9, 2007 at 4:24 am
“you must take a stand somewhere,and standing for the truth is not a bad place to start!”
Any relation between the Bible and truth is purely coincidental. It’s a damned shame that so many people let their lives be mired in millennia-old superstition.
posted December 9, 2007 at 12:50 pm
Oreilly, “You can’t change the truth just because its out of style or not “politically correct”, you either follow the Bible or you don’t.”
The truth used to be according to the Bible, that divorce was only to happen because of infidelity. That owning slaves was an acceptable thing to do. That women were to be controlled by men. Incest was o.k. with your daughters if there wasn’t a wife around. Only the white race was acceptable. The inane list could go on. Must truths are subject to interpretation and the verses you hold up continuously are no different. Look at the people you judge, can’t you see they are the same as you? Their physiology is different than heterosexual people, and that is why they feel diffrently in their ways. You are not holding to all the ‘truths’ of the Bible as the rest of us aren’t, why should you and the rest of the fundamentalists expect the lgbt to do so?
posted December 9, 2007 at 3:49 pm
E. Oreilly:
Times have changed in 2007 years, so counting on a book written by men, edited by men, copied over and over by men (who are really fallible) a couple of thousand years ago, is unreliable. As Henrietta pointed out very well, fortunately many of the so called truths are no longer valid in this time: slavery, incest with your daughter, white’s being the superior race etc. Let’s face it, much of the bible is out of date.
It’s called progress….
posted December 9, 2007 at 3:51 pm
A prophet would be helpful in times like these.
posted December 9, 2007 at 3:58 pm
OOPS! The post at 3:49 Dec.9 to E.Oreilly was done by me, pagansister.
posted December 9, 2007 at 4:16 pm
I’ve said it before and I am sure to say it again…
Unless you are ready to reinstate animal sacrifice (and explain it to your kids and grandkids)and turn your church into a slaughterhouse, then don’t expect to be taken seriously when you get all righteous about saying we need to go back to the Biblical way.
It is time to accept Jesus’ message of love our neighbor and not try to pry the “dust” from their eye (lest you want to lose the log in your own).
California ‘Picolopians, Bon chance and Bon Voyage!
posted December 10, 2007 at 8:14 am
I have two relatives that are gay. One lived and died hiding his sexuality. He was the nicest man alive and served his church to the fullest as a layperson. The youngest gay member is a little freer to be herself but still people are afraid of who she is. I know both relatives are good people. I also know without a doubt that GOD made them the way they are. Jesus walked among us to teach us to be tolerant of all differences in humans. He LOVED everyone he met. Heaven help these people who have truly forgotten HIS teachings. Why do people have to be so afraid of differences? Too many people these days HATE in the name of Christ.
posted December 10, 2007 at 12:41 pm
CSno, Good for you that your heart is open to your loved ones who are different than you. I don’t think most judgmental Christians hate the glbt, they are just carrying a misinterpretation to the uttmost because of whatever motivates them to do so. If it’s fear they should recognize it and get help for it. If it’s extremism in our religion they should recognize that and do something about it.
posted December 11, 2007 at 7:23 pm
It’s not a matter of hate it is a matter of respecting the word of God. the church wants to be right in the eyes of God. Either you are going to follow the Bible or re-write it, this church has decided to follow the word of God.
Jesus said a man should marry a woman period.
posted December 11, 2007 at 8:06 pm
cknuck: There were men in love with men and women in love with women even in the time of Jesus and long before his appearance in the world. The world has continued and will continue with homosexuals and hetersexuals in the world for many thousands of years to come. The facts bear out the truth that the world hasn’t come to an end or gone to the Christian hell, with all forms of adult love in the world. It is a fact also that some folks won’t accept all of their god’s creations, even though they believe she made them, and will continue to think that same gender love is “wrong”. That would be their problem.
cknuck, where in the Bible does the quote with the statement you mentioned written. “Jesus said a man should marry a woman period.”
posted February 25, 2008 at 7:53 pm
WHAT IF…?
God is pure spirit, (or mind) from which all universes (constructs) spring. What if all Creation is an idea, a working-model of interacting laws, springing from the mind of God, designed and sustained continuously by God, through these laws. All, everything that is, existing within the infinite Mind of God.
WHAT IF…?
God had the Idea of creating a workable temporary “accommodation” for education of millions of “dream children” (created souls) -a manifest housing for each, being a body able to negotiate in this animated universe. (Maybe other universes, too – different Housing.)
WHAT IF…?
Not only the Angels but “human souls” were created, to inhabit this universe, and both were given freedom of choice. 1/3 of the Angels, led by Lucifer (Satan) chose separation from God. Still inhabiting the Universe, along with the human souls. Still with free choice, until …
God decides to take action, see below.
WHAT IF…?
God tried this out, but saw that his “children” couldn’t be in touch with Him because they lived in a physical appearing universe, and couldn’t see Him. So they couldn’t communicate with Him. They were not following the laws of the universe and the Experiment was falling apart. The rebel Angels were delighted. They wanted to see it fall apart.
So God decided to visit his children,in human form, so that they could see what He looked like, if “personified”.
They rejected Him, mostly. To those who did not, he promised that He would always be available to them, individually, even after He left. He would always be with them, and would guide them if they asked.
Also, he sent many letters to his children, through the Bible, written over hundreds of years by different human beings, but always speaking in His own recognizable voice.
He had shown the rebel angels how limited their “free choice”really was, and proven who is really the Boss, by allowing his Human form to be tortured and killed, to prove that it couldn’t kill HIM. That the body is just a temporary construct.
What more could He do????