Episcopal statement dissatisfies Diocese of San Joaquin

Posted by Kendall Harmon

Episcopal leaders instead affirmed that they will "exercise restraint" in approving another gay bishop and will not approve prayers to bless same-sex couples. The leaders were in New Orleans for the church's House of Bishops' semiannual meeting.

The statement mostly reiterated previous pledges made by church leaders and did not satisfy officials at the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin. The local diocese would have considered pulling back its bid to split from the U.S. Episcopal Church if the bishops agreed to the Anglican Communion's demand to stop consecrating gay bishops, said the Rev. Van McCalister, the diocese's spokesman.

"I think they have used the exact terminology in the past, and it doesn't change anything," McCalister said. A change in doctrine was "what a lot of people were hoping and praying for."

Read it all.

Filed under: * Anglican - Episcopal • Episcopal Church (TEC) • TEC Bishops • Sept07 HoB Meeting • TEC Conflicts • TEC Conflicts: San Joaquin

5 Comments
Posted September 27, 2007 at 8:17 am [Printer Friendly] [Print w/ comments]



1. Cennydd wrote:

Ms Key misses the point.  If we decide to simply “walk away,” is it not still a schism?  And it is not we who are doing the “walking,” but TEC, it seems to me.

September 27, 12:06 pm | [comment link]
2. Bob from Boone wrote:

If the bishop and many congregations of San Joaquin split, they will not do so to “join the Anglican Communion.” This diocese is already part of the Anglican Communion. These persons may leave, but the Diocese of San Joaquin will continue to be part of TEC, with a new bishop, and clergy to staff old parishes.

I respectfully disagre with Cennydd about whose “walking apart,” but that will surpirse no one.

All things considered, this is another sad situation in the Church that no one on whatever side can rejoice in.

September 28, 6:59 am | [comment link]
3. Cennydd wrote:

Bob, we can argue about this issue from now until Hell freezes over, if that’s what you want, but it still isn’t going to change things.  Where do you expect to find parishioners to replace all of those lost from TEC in this diocese?  At the most, you may end up with a few hundred, and you’ll have to close all but a very few of the parishes and missions.  The dissatisfaction of people in this diocese is far greater than you may think.

September 28, 9:49 am | [comment link]
4. Van+ wrote:

The Fresno Bee article is somewhat misleading.  My response to Mr Orosco was that, in my opinion, the delegates to our December convention might have re-considered our constitutional amendments if the HOB had responded in a manner that demonstrated real repentance and an honest change of direction.  Neither Bishop Schofield, nor anyone speaking on behalf of the diocese, have ever expressed our position as being driven by the single issue of homosexual ordinations.  Such ordinations are symptomatic of the deeper issue, which is a disregard for the authority of Scripture and our effective Christian witness to a broken world.  The regard for Holy Scripture as our authority and our Christian witness are the motivating factors for our actions and statements.

September 28, 2:03 pm | [comment link]
5. Harvey wrote:

#4 Well stated!

September 28, 3:25 pm | [comment link]
Registered members must log in to comment.



Next entry (above): Minneapolis Star Tribune: The bishops’ statement on gays didn’t change much

Previous entry (below): Joint Statement on the Resolution of the House of Bishops (AAC, Network, FiFNA)

Return to blog homepage

Return to Mobile view (headlines)