Associated Press
Fresno, California – Episcopal leaders have ousted a breakaway conservative bishop in a struggle for control of the Diocese of San Joaquin and its properties.
The Episcopal House of Bishops, meeting in Texas, took the action Wednesday against Bishop John-David Schofield, who last December led the Fresno diocese to secede from the Episcopal Church.
The Episcopal Church is the Anglican body in the U.S.
San Joaquin is the first full diocese to split from the liberal-leaning denomination, which in 2003 consecrated the first openly gay Episcopal bishop, V. Gene Robinson of New Hampshire.
Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori, the head of the national church, has been working to maintain oversight of the central California church region. Episcopal leaders still consider the diocese part of the denomination. Schofield, however, aligned the diocese with the conservative Anglican Church of the Southern Cone, based in Argentina.
The Episcopal Church is the Anglican body in the U.S.
The House of Bishops voted to “depose” Schofield, which removes him as head of the diocese and bars him from performing any religious duties.
Schofield, who opposes ordaining women and gays, vowed in a statement to continue leading the diocese as a member of the House of Bishops of the Southern Cone.
“I am still an active Anglican bishop,” he said.
He warned that any attempt by the denomination to “seize our property” through litigation would violate biblical teachings. The diocese includes 48 church buildings in prime real estate markets throughout California.
“It appears as though the real motivation behind all of this is the use of raw power and coveting property,” Schofield said.
Jefferts Schori cautioned that “since he is no longer the bishop of San Joaquin it would be inappropriate for him to retain title.”
About 2,000 parishioners in the 8,000-member diocese want to stay in the Episcopal Church and have hoped for Schofield’s removal.
“We’ve been waiting for this,” said Ron Miller, a former vestry member at a Turlock parish that has split into opposing camps. “Many of us have gone through very hurtful times and vilifications by Schofield supporters. This is the initial step leading us toward healing and reconciliation.”
Since last August, dozens of worshippers have been studying the Bible at a parishioner’s home and are planning to hold Easter Sunday services in a park because congregants who support the bishop have control of St. Francis parish, Miller said.
Jefferts Schori and other leaders plan to travel to Stockton on March 29 for a convention in which parishioners who wish to stay with the national denomination will elect a new bishop.
The global Anglican Communion is a family of churches that trace their roots to the Church of England. The fellowship is on the brink of schism over Robinson’s consecration.
Schofield and other conservatives believe Scripture bars same-sex relationships, and he told San Joaquin churchgoers that they risked moral decay by staying with the Episcopal Church.
Several dozen conservative U.S. parishes have split from the national denomination since 2003 and, like Schofield, aligned with like-minded Anglican provinces overseas. But a majority of Episcopalians accept gay relationships, based on biblical teachings on social justice.
Copyright 2008 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Beliefnet
Advertisement
posted March 13, 2008 at 4:19 pm
Good for them. I’m sure they will be better off without the cone head.
And clearly he has his eyes on what may well be the diocese’s property, subject no doubt to judicial interpretation. The Southern Cone may not be so happy with him if he loses that.
posted March 13, 2008 at 7:31 pm
There is nothing liberal about Jesus and the Episcopal leaders have very little regard for the Bible so if he is counting on them being biblical he can forget about it.
posted March 13, 2008 at 7:42 pm
Schofield has certainly NOT been a unifying force in the church and now the powers that be had kicked his butt out…how appropriate.
Of course he wants to keep the buildings…and I agree,nnmns, the Southern Cone might be unhappy if they don’t end up “belonging” to said Southern Cone. I’m sure the buildings and property are worth a small fortune. I can’t remember where the Southern Cone is, wasn’t it in South America somewhere? I know there was an article on it here recently.
Schofield certainly is a great representative of Christianity, telling his followers that they risk moral decay if they stayed with the Episcopal church because TEC believes in same sex relationships and women priests.
posted March 13, 2008 at 9:03 pm
It sounds as though the parishoners will be happy to vote for a new bishop to take the place of Schofield on March 29ths convention in Stockton, CA with Shori in charge. They’ll be able to worship and study their Bibles in their Church again without bullying by the “Cone” people.
posted March 13, 2008 at 10:12 pm
Hey, if you are Godless you are automatically one up on everybody else.
But I’m afraid those folks aren’t. Theirs is just different than, and better than, yours.
posted March 13, 2008 at 10:52 pm
ck -
You said: “There is nothing liberal about Jesus….”
I suppose you’re right, in the sense that liberalism and radicalism are distinct. Jesus was shockingly, stunningly radical in how he dealt with ordinary people (such as lepers, tax collectors, or the Samaritan woman at the well), and how he dealt with religious hierarchy (such as scribes and Pharisees, “blind guides”). Radical love, radical hospitality, is what cost him his life on earth – which opened for us the gates to eternal life.
So no: nothing liberal at all. Thanks for the reminder.
posted March 13, 2008 at 11:20 pm
“Schofield has certainly NOT been a unifying force in the church and now the powers that be had kicked his butt out…how appropriate.”
Well, see, you can’t really say they “kicked his butt out”…he took that with him when he left. So really, this is just kind of like the old TV/movie cliche, “You can’t fire me, I quit!,” except in reverse order.
The one thing I agree with most of the usual posters here is that it’s better if Schofield and his followers leave. Let the liberals have their liberal church, let the conservatives have their conservative church, everyone’ll be happy in the end. The conservatives will probably have to give up the properties, but true faith requires sacrifices. (And they can probably buy them back eventually, when the ECUSA sputters out of existence in the next generation or so…;-)
God bless.
posted March 14, 2008 at 10:14 am
Joey:
True, the butt went with him as he left TEC. (:
posted March 14, 2008 at 10:19 pm
Well, wherever his butt is, it seems others’ butts weren’t in the chairs they ought to have been in.
There is a report out today which seems to suggest that Schofield’s and Cox’s depositions were done in a canonically incorrect manner.
Specifically, the canon states that a bishop cannot be deposed except by a majority of serving bishops (not just a majority of bishops present, and not just just bishops with jurisdiction – diocesans) – that is all diocesans, suffragans, coadjutors, and assistants.
But it seems there were fewer than half of the House of Bishops present at the meeting at Camp Allen: therefore, it cannot be that consent was given by a majority of serving bishops.
This is hot off the press, and nobody knows where it’s going to go. Stay tuned.
posted March 17, 2008 at 9:38 pm
Well, after some examination and re-examination of the canons, it appears that the depositions were canonically correct, after all.
Seems someone at “The Living Church” had misread what constitutes the number of bishops necessary to depose another bishop (a supermajority, though that word is not used in the Canon). It has since been certified that the supermajority number is 63, and that there were 68 bishops at the meeting (and, apparently, the votes for deposition were unanimous or nearly so).
So – false alarm, it seems.