Wednesday, August 6, 2008

San Joaquin to Bishop Lamb: We accept the recognition by the ABC of our Bishop and reject any purported authority of TEC

The Diocese of San Joaquin - Fresno, California

August 4, 2008

The Rt. Rev. Jerry Lamb
P. O. Box 7606
Stockton, CA 95267

Dear Bishop Lamb:

We, the Bishop, Standing Committee and Diocesan Council of the Diocese of San Joaquin, receive with gladness the recognition of Bishop Schofield by the Archbishop of Canterbury "as a full member of the episcopal fellowship of the Province of the Southern Cone within the Anglican Communion, and as such [he] cannot be regarded as having withdrawn from the Anglican Communion."

We do not recognize the uncanonical actions of the House of Bishops of The Episcopal Church in moving to depose Bishop John-David Schofield. Prior to this attempt that failed for lack of votes required by TEC's Canons, the Diocese of San Joaquin assembled at its Annual Convention on December 8, 2007, voted overwhelmingly to become a constituent Diocese of the Southern Cone of South America and as such remain a recognized Diocese within the Anglican Communion.

A subsequent action followed in which Bishop Schofield, a full member in the House of Bishops of the Episcopal Church, followed his diocese and was welcomed by Archbishop Gregory Venables and the Synod into full membership in the House of Bishops of the Southern Cone.

Therefore, as the lay and clergy leaders of the Diocese of San Joaquin, within the Province of the Southern Cone, we accept the recognition by the Archbishop of Canterbury of our Bishop and reject any purported authority of The Episcopal Church, or Bishop Jerry Lamb, over any of our ministries. Our obligation is to conform to the doctrine, discipline, and worship of the world-wide Anglican Communion.

The Rt. Rev. John-David Schofield, Bishop
The Standing Committee of the Diocese of San Joaquin
The Diocesan Council of the Diocese of San Joaquin

6 comments:

Fred Schwartz said...

Dear friends,
How deluded can one be? You are using a statment from Archbishop Venables that "says" that the ABC perhaps recognizes deposed Bishop Schofield. In addition, by Mr. Schofield, Mr. Venables and Mr. Akinola as well as every other GAFCONite "sweart by the Jerusalem Declaration" which states in part that the ABC is superflous to the Anglican communion.
What's up guys? Any port in a storm?

David Katzakian said...

My Dear Mr. Schwartz:

Please remember that Bishop Schofield was NOT deposed as the vote was not taken within TEC's own Canons. Former bishop Lamb is just that, a former bishop. His appointment and the convention are invalid because they were not called by the proper authorities according to TEC's Canons.

Fred Schwartz said...

To the Mr. Schofield and the clergy yet to recognize Bishop Jerry Lamb:

The time is Now! The trial is over. You may continue as you are but you will lose your laity. Why wait any longer. Return now to the Episcopal Church and enjoy the furits of the prodigal son. Please, we are waiting for you all so that we may be made whole. Do not hesitate, call Bihop Lamb now.

Fr Van McCalister said...

Fred,

We have been very gracious and open in posting your inflammatory comments in the interest of maintaining a free exchange of dialog. However, the next time you refer to any bishop or archbishop in the Anglican Communion - including Bp Schofield, whose orders were recognized by bishops and archbishops all over the world (including the ABC) - the next time you condescendingly refer to them as "Mr", I will delete your comment. You are free to visit and comment on this blog, but please show us the same respect that you have been shown. The way you and others continue to present your supposed message of reconciliation in such a rude and offensive way makes one wonder about the sincerity of it.

Fred Schwartz said...

Fr. Van,

Please read this out. Mr. Schofield was deposed by the House of Bishops. Let's just suppose, wild as this may seem, that he decided to return to TEC. He would have to come back as Mr. Schofield and have the deposition reversed -- howver that is accomplished. So, as you can see, there is no disrespect meant by the reference. In point of fact, the post was meant to be a plea for those who have not yet responded to Bishop Lamb's request for clarification to respond and come back to TEC. Again, no disrespect intended. I believe I have been repsectful and careful with my words so that no one would be hurt. If I have somehow hurt someone I apologize for the hurt.
If you choose to restrain my voice by editing your blog -- that is your perogative.

Fr Van McCalister said...

Fred,

Thank you for your apology. While I am not hurt by your comments, I do find them to be disrespectful and patronizing. Even though I question the validity of PB Schori's orders, I refer to her as the PB out of respect for the office and those who trust that her orders are valid. And while you may disagree, I am confident that you are alert enough to notice that there are a significant number of Episcopalians and Anglicans who still believe that Bp Schofield's orders are valid. By the way, no one has attempted to depose Abps Venables and Akinola yet, so I am not sure how your use of "Mr" in their case should be understood as respectful, even by your own criteria. I posted your most recent comment against my admonition to you in order to complete our dialog. However, I maintain that I will delete mocking and disrespectful references to our Anglican bishops. You are free to offer your opinions here and disagree with us all day long but I am confident that you are capable of doing that without being disrespectful to those we hold dear. Just for the record, I have never gone onto your blog to write anything in a disrespectful manner toward Bp Lamb or PB Schori.