Episcopal leader appoints clergyman to serve Bakersfield churches

Posted by Kendall Harmon

A national Episcopal leader visited Bakersfield Thursday, heard believers’ concerns about the San Joaquin Diocese’s recent secession from the church and appointed a local clergyman as a temporary missionary priest to serve Bakersfield area believers.

He also said the national church considers the diocese’s Dec. 8 decision to place itself under overseas Anglican rule illegal.

The Rev. Canon Robert Moore, of Seattle, who was appointed by the Episcopal Church’s presiding bishop, the Most Rev. Katharine Jefferts Schori, as an “interim pastoral presence” in the San Joaquin Valley, spent the day in the greater Bakersfield area as part of a five-day “listening tour” that will culminate in a valley-wide conference in Hanford on Saturday.

At a Thursday night gathering of 60 to 70 believers and clergy at First Congregational Church and hosted by Remain Episcopal in the Diocese of San Joaquin, a faith community opposed to the split, Moore received hearty applause when he announced he had appointed the Rev. Tim Vivian, a Bakersfield resident, to a “temporary pastoral position as missionary priest under my direct supervision, which puts him within the jurisdiction of the presiding bishop of the Episcopal Church.”

Read it all.

Filed under: * Anglican - EpiscopalEpiscopal Church (TEC)Presiding Bishop TEC ConflictsTEC Conflicts: San Joaquin

Posted January 26, 2008 at 5:40 pm [Printer Friendly] [Print w/ comments]

1. AnglicanFirst wrote:

Moore+ said,

““We’re inventing it as we go,” Moore said about the arduous process of rebuilding the split-up church,....”

The problem is that ECUSA’s revisionists have been “inventing” theology as they have been “going,” while leading its churches into heresy and sin over the past forty plus years.

I am already witnessing a few Episcopalians who want to remain Episcopalian and are distressed at the ‘problems’ in the church.

What they don’t realize, is that they might remain Episcopalian, but by doing so, they will no longer be supporting “the Faith once given.”  That by their own choice, they will be separating themselves from Scripture, the Church Catholic and the Anglican Communion.

Its very sad.  They are following a wide path to damnation.  The depth of their religious conceptualization of the situation is at about the same level a baseball fan who ‘loves’ the Red Sox and ‘hates’ the New York Yankees.  Their reasoning goes beyond being described as uninformed, inane and bizarre.

January 26, 7:12 pm | [comment link]
2. Jim the Puritan wrote:

Sounds like there are 60 to 70 “Episcopalians” left.  Everyone else is gone.  Will be a rather small diocese.

January 26, 8:36 pm | [comment link]
3. Tom Roberts wrote:

Is there such a canonical entity as ” the jurisdiction of the presiding bishop of the Episcopal Church”?

January 26, 8:42 pm | [comment link]
4. Grandmother wrote:

SsHHHHHH Tom, don’t put any ideas in her head.  Next thing ya know we’ll have teeny tiny dioceses all over the country, “no boundaries” for sure.

January 26, 9:36 pm | [comment link]
5. Cennydd wrote:

I see the time coming when any new Episcopal “dioceses” could be the size of two good-sized parishes, and the number of bishops will quadruple.

January 27, 12:17 am | [comment link]
6. VaAnglican wrote:

There was a full-court press put together to have a massive crowd show up to this meeting.  And all they had were fewer people than could make up a single viable parish??  And that number undoubtedly included some who would not even be in such a parish.  This should (but won’t) get the attention of the revisionists.  This certainly does make litigation look rather silly, doesn’t it.  And why haven’t we been hearing much lately about how democratic we all are in the Episcopal Church?

January 27, 1:00 am | [comment link]
7. VaAnglican wrote:

Just watched the video news report from abc30.com regarding the service at Church of the Savior, Hanford, for those who wish to “Remain Episcopal.”  Although the church was full, by freezing the video and counting pews (about 15 on either side of the aisle) and numbers of bodies in each pew (about six or seven on each side), it would appear that around 200 were in attendance.  If there is transcept seating it might have been more.  Certainly it was more than the 80 this parish, one of steadily declining ASA since 1999, is accustomed to having each Sunday.  Certainly, too, it’s not enough for a diocese, even if the number exceeded 200.  I’m sure some will be impressed that an Episcopal church can actually fill all its seats. But those there included folks who are not revisionist, but simply don’t want to leave the Episopal Church.  Undoubtedly, too, they included some outsiders there to show their support and ensure the pictures weren’t as grim as the situation is for the Episcopal Church. 

Interesting remarks by the national church lawyer about litigation decisions being “thoughtful,” “economical,” and “charitable.”  “Economical” is not something that they’ve cared about in litigation thus far.  Perhaps there’s some understanding by someone that this would be an utter waste of money?

January 27, 1:55 am | [comment link]
8. nwlayman wrote:

The remnant seems sensible enough for KJS to reign over.  Remember, you folks made her a bishop though she had never even been in charge of a parish or mission of her own!  Then you made her bishop over the whole (shrinking) ball of wax.  It’s altogether appropriate she rule a handful of loyalists.  She has to start somewhere.

January 27, 2:17 am | [comment link]
9. MJD_NV wrote:

Since when can a PB appoint over the will of a duly constituted Standing Committee? 

Polity, anyone?

January 27, 5:55 pm | [comment link]
10. Tom Roberts wrote:

9 this has been thrashed about in other threads, but ‘she cannot’ is the canonical answer. Her office does not have that authority to meddle in parochial matters. Her best call would have been to call for a diocesan convention of those remaining, and as long as 5 parishes showed up, declare the SJ renewed with an interim bishop and newly elected standing committee. Then the parishes could either call new rectors or keep their old one, with the interim bishop’s consent. Life would have gone back to normal, but no, Schori doesn’t like normal processes in Jan 2008.

January 27, 6:05 pm | [comment link]
11. KevinBabb wrote:

Isn’t there a tradition in catholic ecclesiology that six parishes are necessary to form a diocese?

The Via Sinistera types aren’t nearly as good at constructing Potemkin villages as they used to be…60-70 people?  The pattern of the last four years is that liberal remnants of parishes get touted as the “future” of a growing congregation…then, as the “ringers” drift back to their liberal parishes, the true “rump” congregation stuggles for a couple of years, then gives up the ghost (See, among others, Redeemer, Manchester, NH).  Are we now going to see this on a diocesan level in the geographic area once occupied by the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin, until those three or four congregations get absorbed into El Camino Real or California, as is geographically most appropriate?

January 27, 7:37 pm | [comment link]
12. Planonian wrote:

#5 I see the time coming when any new Episcopal “dioceses” could be the size of two good-sized parishes, and the number of bishops will quadruple.

Heh. You mean like some of the “continuing Anglican” denominations ?

January 28, 3:32 pm | [comment link]
Registered members must log in to comment.

Next entry (above): Geoffrey Rowell: Paul shows how faith could turn all our lives around

Previous entry (below): New Anglican American bishop to visit Christ Church in Texas

Return to blog homepage

Return to Mobile view (headlines)