A friend wrote this on another blog.
The retrogressives attempt to walk off with the assets illegally. When TEC asserts its legal rights to its own properties, the retrogressives howl like puppies having their tails clipped.

I would surmise that their ship is foundering, no help is available from the steamy latitudes, and IRD largess will soon dry up.

#2 Can we be spared from such silliness and pomposity, Revamundo? All the men you cite are men of character and high principle who care more for the welfare of their souls and those in their charge than mere property or title or authority. What would people have said of Washington at Valley Forge? To watch men like Duncan++ or Ackerman” is to see what character looks like - how men behave when vowas and principle are worth more than possession of mere things and worth the absorption of petty scorn and easy cheap shots. Pursuit of holiness is worth more than proud churches with spires that shall not reach to heaven. Indeed, holiness is what gives worship its meaning because it is in the spirit of holiness that we find God. At our confirmations we were asked if we would continue in the Apostles’ teaching and fellowship. These Christians are taking that vow seriously.

We L2 signed our real world names as well.  My parents would sign it but, alas, they don’t do internet.

Revamundo,
I believe that we should pray for your friend’s soul, because I believe that he has put it in serious jeopardy.  Maybe he doesn’t care.  And if he doesn’t, then he is not a Christian, let alone an Anglican.

On the other hand, when I encounter revisionts/progressives like your friend, I tend to avoid interaction.  This is because your friend’s part of the interaction will be the ‘lip synching’ presention of a revisionist/progressive pary line with no other neural engagement on his part.  If he fits the stereotype.  And I sense that he is of that type.

This problem within ECUSA has been a politically driven, not theologically or ecclesiologically driven, creature from it’s onset.

I believe that your friend and his ilk are nothing but political opportunists who about fifty years came upon a church vulnerable to their ambitions and the present crisis is a direct result of their machinations.

AnglicanFirst:

You really think Revamundo’s friend’s soul is in jeopardy?

I think his appraisal of the situation is highly unrealistic, and his evident sense of satisfaction at what he sees as the discomfiture of reasserters does no credit to our side, but that just makes him factually mistaken and swayed by partisanship.  Most of us, I daresay, fall into those traps from time to time.

This is because your friend’s part of the interaction will be the ‘lip synching’ presention of a revisionist/progressive pary line with no other neural engagement on his part.

Grant…I find it ironic that you make this statement. Over and over you’ve paroted with the conservative party line, said you just don’t understand how TEC can be so mean and expect you to not take property that doesn’t belong to you.  You tend to avoid interaction because you have no defense for your stand on the issues.

For the liberal usurpers: Mega-corporations like Exxon or Microsoft, despite their financial war-chests often lose in court cases.

300 million? What THAT could do for the MDGs!

Hey, that’s TEN times the number of people who answered the EC Covenant Draft study!

You guys are too much! ha! It is time to face reality. If people want to leave TEC, they should do so freely, but they shouldn’t expect they can defy one of the components of being Episcopalian—the church owns the property.

Revamundo, why hasn’t 815 fixed the leak in their roof or mowed their lawn?  Why aren’t they paying the insurance premiums on the property?  We just got a quote for a capital repair… do know the office to which we should direct it for payment? 

If the ownership issue is as simple as you say, it seems they’ve abandoned their property in my neck of the woods.

Once upon a time there was a man who had two sons.  One of them said, “give me half your property, for I am leaving you.”  The man knew how his son would use the property, and he knew that this was a rejection of the father’s values.  Still, he gave him the property and his blessing.

Boy, it’s a good thing we aren’t supposed to act like that father.  What a dumb decision he made, huh? 

You guys are too much! ha! It is time to face reality. If people want to leave TEC, they should do so freely, but they shouldn’t expect they can defy one of the components of being Episcopalian—the church owns the property.

Rev, just a warning: If you post one more message here, I shall lay legal claim over your home, cars, investments, bank accounts.  We’ll call it the “Jeffersonian Canon.”  That you established, maintained and grew those assets is irrelevant, of course.  You can signify your willingness to transfer ownership with just one more message.

If ownership of local property by the national entity is such a critical component of Anglicanism, why wasn’t it legislated until 30 years ago?

Please help me understand. Is TEC compelled to respond to this petition?

Okay, Revamundo!  If TEC claims to own our local church buildings, then may THEY’D like to pay for all of the repairs…...including the roof, the A-frame supports, the new restrooms, new classrooms, the insurance, and whatever else we can dream up!

TheRoman:  I don’t know…...but if they don’t, it just shows their arrogance and haughtiness (I could mention several other things, but that wouldn’t be “seemly”).