John David Schofield and THE LETTER

With the red finger marks still on his face, with the feel of the sting still fresh and the ringing in his ears still going on let’s take the opportunity to evaluate the letter from Archbishop Gregory Venables to John David Mercer Schofield.

I greet you in the name of the Lord from the UK where the Lambeth Conference is only just about to begin.
[ I want you, John David Schofield, to know that I am here in Lambeth and you are not.]

Though I will be in touch about the Lambeth Conference at a later date, at this critical time in the Anglican Communion, I have several things to share with you to address some of the aspects of the current crisis.
[Though you were there I am not sure you got what I want you to get out of the conference, but never mind, I will tell you what you should get out of GAFCON.]

The Anglican Communion has been in chaos for a number of years. As a whole,the structures of the Communion seem to have been unwilling to speak clearly and definitively about theological foundations and limits.
[ John-David, you and your fellow bishops really screwed up the section of the Anglican Communion known as The Episcopal Church.]

It also recognized the cooperation and mutual accountability of a group of small (but growing) group of Primates who are willing to be clear in affirming the authority of the Bible and other Anglican tenets.
[Clearly, you are not one of those primates, but I am and we, unlike you Americans, know what we are doing.]

We have agreed that we will seek consensus before implementing changes that impact other Provinces in the circle. That is the way the whole Communion should be operating.
[John David, your way to break away without any consensus was wrong. Our way is to seek consensus, clearly we are better, smarter and more intelligent.]

We also agreed with the historical perspective that the structural authority of the bishop of a diocese is not absolute. The church has always taught that bishops are accountable for their teaching and their actions. The difficulty in our day has come when there are Provinces that are unwilling to hold bishops accountable to any discipline in the face of unbiblical actions and pronouncements.
[John David, do you suppose ++Venables means you!]

As you know, by the concerted and agreed action of both the House of Bishops and the Provincial Synod, we are glad to give you full membership and a safe haven in the Southern Cone while a long term solution is found.
[John David, if you are a good boy, you can continue to play but remember I can call it quits any time I want!]

In addition, I have been in conversation with Archbishop Rowan. Over the weekend I received the following message from him: "I understand that Bishop John-David Schofield has been accepted as a full member of the episcopal fellowship of the Province of the Southern Cone within the Anglican Communion and as such cannot be regarded as having withdrawn from the Anglican Communion.
[ Not John David, Greg Venables has been in touch with the Archbishop. He tells ME you will probably be okay – unless I say differently.]

Bishop Schofield has elected to decline the invitation to the Lambeth Conference issued to him last year although that decision does not signal any withdrawal from the Communion. … I am in agreement with Bishop John-David's decision not to attend the Lambeth Conference.
[John David it is good of you to do so and I am happy to be the one to tell you so. You do, don’t you?]

I do not know if John David Mercer Schofield has EVER been treated in public as badly as this letter seems to treat him. He is left being the “water boy” for the football team. John David spent quite literally years figuring out exactly what to do, when to do it, and how to do it as well as which province to seek asylum. He has hand picked all his clergy and all his staff. John David has promised to deliver the Anglican communion in all its glory to the people in his see. Now he finds out “it ain’t his show no more!” I cannot for one second think JDS enjoyed this letter or the contents or the person who wrote it. He gets this letter from someone he trusted and it says YOU are NOT in charge! I, Archbishop Gregory Venables, Primate of the Southern Cone, am in charge and I will tell you when you can go, when you can stay, what you should think, what you should do.

I am going to make a radical suggestion. The Episcopal Church is a big tent, correct? We are also a loving and forgiving entity that I hope embodies mercy at our core. Soooo, John David Mercer Schofield, wanna come home? Pick up your phone and dial 1-209-952-0006 and come on back. Please do not think that it cannot be done, all things are possible with God! Hey, we are waiting with a fatted calf!

Fr. Scott joins us in blog-land

Pop on over and see Scott Hankin's new blog, Father Scott and Co. - Ask Some New Questions. He has included a thread for general conversation about Lambeth, and an initial "food for thought" post.

Fr. Scott is now on the blog roll here if you don't have time to visit right now - but do go say hello!

Put down your coffee cup...

My top-secret agents have transmitted this exclusive video footage of a very special, pre-Lambeth pilgrimage. Recognize anyone?



Somehow the Ross Perot connection works for me in all this. Enjoy.

What's my line?

Where does our friend Fred come up with such scandalous ideas?

As Fred notes: "What's My Line? was one of network television's longest running and most beloved prime time game shows with a broadcast run of seventeen and one-half years. The game consisted of four panelists trying to guess the occupation of a guest contestant. As the questioning rotated, a panel member asked questions and the guest would answer either "yes" or "no." A contestant received $5 for each "no" answer. Ten "no" answers ended the game in favor of the contestant. A mystery guest segment was also included in which the panelists were blindfolded. The mystery guests were paid $500 as an appearance fee whether they won or lost the game. This was in addition to the maximum $50 game winnings. Guest panelists were paid $750 as an appearance fee.

Well, hello - and welcome to What’s My Line? I’m Fred Swartz and I will be your guest moderator for tonight’s show. First a brief history for those not familiar with our game show.

Today, we have a very special game. First, our usual panelists have taken the night off , so we have three guest panelists. First, please welcome a legend in his own mind, the one and only Greg Venables! Greg likes to be called Archbishop since he is the primate of the Southern Cone. The second guest panelist is a world renowned blogger from the other side: please welcome...Ms. Sarah Hey. And, our final guest panelist, none other than the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams - welcome, Cantuar!

Now, will our mystery guest sign in please?

First guest: Hi, my name is John David Mercer Schofield and I am the Bishop of the diocese of San Joaquin.
Second guest: Hi, my name is David Virtue and I am the Bishop of the diocese of San Joaquin.
Third guest: Hi, my name is Jerry Lamb and I am the Bishop of the diocese of San Joaquin.

Moderator: Well panelists, looks like we have our work cut out for us tonight. We have at least two pretenders to the Episcopal see in San Joaquin. So, let’s get right into it. Greg, you are always looking for something new and different, why don’t you start us off.

Greg: Well, John-David, did you search for just the most special archbishop to help you fly south for the winter?

JDS: Yes.

Greg: Okay, great. Jerry, did you go to GAFCON?

JL: Ah, no Greg, sorry.

Sarah: Well, David, do bishops wear purple shirts?

DV: Ah, Sarah, no.

Rowan: Jerry Lamb, have you used the terms reconciliation and love in the same sentence?

JL: Why yes I have.

Rowan: John-David, how about you.?

JDS: Huh? Ah, I don’t think so.

Moderator: We will take that as a no. Okay panelists, we are running out of time, please mark your ballots. You have 30 seconds to do so.

(Tic-tic-tic-tic-tic-tic-tic-tic-tic-tic-tic-tic-tic-tic-tic-tic-tic-…tic 30...) Time's up!

Moderator: Let’s now start with Sarah Hey. Sarah who do you think is the real Bishop of the diocese of San Joaquin?

Sarah Hey: Well, Fred, I need to disqualify myself ‘cause I already know one of the panelists to be a longtime reasserter from away back and fellow blogger for the pure and holy, David Virtue.

Moderator: Darn Sarah, it’s okay to disqualify yourself but just like your blog you’ve prematurely outed our mystery guest. Criminy, will you Standfirm folks ever stop doing that stuff? Our next panelist please, -Archbishop Venables.

Greg Venables: Well after not much thought I have come to the only conclusion the Bible allows me to. I believe that the true bishop the diocese of San Joaquin is none other than John-David Schofield. (stage whisper, did I do that right Rowan?)

Moderator: Ah Greg, you cannot secretly communicate with the Archbishop of Canterbury. Please don’t be whispering while the show is in progress. Now, Rowan, how about you?

Rowan Williams: Well, Fred, I have given this much thought and prayer and I know exactly who the Bishop of the Diocese of San Joaquin. In fact, I will issue him an invitation to the Lambeth Conference right now! Jerry Lamb, you are the bishop of the Diocese of San Joaquin and I want you and your lovely wife to come to Canterbury and participate with all of us this summer.

Moderator: That is correct Rowan – you have correctly identified the one and only bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin!

And look at that, the old clock on the wall says its time to go! See you next week when another set of guest panelists try to guess, “Who is the good Samaritan?" Good night!

(Okay, "blame" Fred for writing this...me for putting it up, he gave me a chance to nix it. Heh heh, of course I had to share.)

ABC - 123

Reportedly our spiritual leader - and host of the 2008 Lambeth Conference - has come out in defense of plurality in the Anglican Communion...and against central authority. Read the brief note at the Church Times : Central control not Anglican, says Williams. You need to be a subscriber to read the full interview.

American Pie

When in doubt - post a recipe, and think chocolate. I believe credit goes to Southern Living magazine for this version. You can't go wrong a pie recipe from the steel magnolias - this one has a traditional pudding-style filling.

Old-Fashioned Chocolate Cream Pie

3/4 cup sugar
1/4 cup cocoa (Dutch-process preferred)
1/4 cup plus 2 teaspoons cornstarch
1/8 teaspoon salt
3 egg yolks, beaten
3 cups milk
1-1/2 tablespoons butter (real butter, please)
1-1/2 teaspoons pure vanilla extract

1 baked 9-inch pastry shell

3/4 cup whipping cream
1-2 tablespoons sugar (to taste)
1/2 teaspoon pure vanilla extract

Combine sugar, cornstarch, cocoa and salt in a heavy saucepan; stir well. Combine egg yolks and milk and gradually stir into sugar mixture. Cook over medium heat, stirring constantly, until mixture thickens and boils. Boil one minute, stirring constantly. Remove from heat; stir in butter and vanilla. Immediately pour custard into pie shell. Cover custard with waxed paper (press directly onto mixture). Cool 30 minutes at room temperature then chill overnight.

Beat whipping cream, sugar and vanilla until soft peaks form - spread over chilled pie filling.

(Corrected to omit bananas in original post - don't ask!)

I recall a couple of friends who live south of the U.S. and north of the "Cone" wanted some decent instructions on making a pie crust. I think I have found a decent series of videos about the process: Secrets of Great Pie Crusts. Your host is a Southern woman , so she includes hints on how to deal with your local humidity and heat. You will need some simple tools and equipment, but the process is shown without using a food processor (unlike many of the "gourmet" food site video selections).

Separation of Church and State: Or, Look What I Found

(Note: please welcome our friend Fred Schwartz to the "team" here at OTA. Here's his first official post - thanks Fred! )
With the advent of the Southern Cone now taking titular oversight of John David Schofield and with many of our former Episcopalians now safely in the arms of foreign dictators it behooves us to take a look at what one long term scenario may hold for the United States. Please keep in mind that as far as I can find, there is no other province set up quite like the province known as The Episcopal Church in the United States. Our constitution and canons, our organizational structure and our underlying philosophy are all based on the revolutionary war and our break from the Church of England.

In today's U.S., revolution, should there be one, will come from within. This is nothing new, many scholars, far more adept than I, have posited this. In fact, each four year cycle, as we are fond of saying, a mini-revolution happens. Yes, our election system is geared towards just that event. Let me hasten to add, revolution does not necessarily require violence of the type we see in other areas of the world. In fact Thomas Jefferson said, a little revolution every once in a while is a good thing.

Given all of that I now call your attention to the following statement:
“The United States has a long tradition of separating church from state, yet a powerful inclination to mix religion and politics. Throughout our nation's history, great political and social movements – from abolition to women's suffrage to civil rights to today's struggles over abortion and gay marriage – have drawn upon religious institutions for moral authority, inspirational leadership and organizational muscle. In recent years, religion has been woven more deeply into the fabric of partisan politics than ever before.” PEW Research Center http://pewforum.org/religion-politics/

We have seen a rise of the religious right in politics most notably culminating with the election of President George W. Bush. His use of the religious right to gain “traction” for certain issues is not only not secret he publicly courts the most famous of those including Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell types in order to muster support in all its forms for all sorts of issues.

Now, before we get carried away, the first amendment allows for the free expression of religion and we all take advantage of that freedom. Some more than others. A notorious case of the "others" is when the Bush Administration went after All Saints Pasadena, CA for anti-Iraq war statements. The Los Angeles Times wrote an article in 2006 about the IRS investigation that was eventually dropped.

“Rep. Adam B. Schiff (D-Burbank), who unsuccessfully tried to launch a Government Accountability Office investigation into the IRS' probes of churches nationwide last year, called the summons "a very disturbing escalation" of the agency's scrutiny of All Saints.

"I don't want religious organizations to become arms of campaigns," he said. "But they should be able to talk about issues of war and peace without fear of losing tax-exempt status. If they can't, they'll have little to say from the pulpit." “

So, clearly, we protect our right for political dissent through our churches. The PEW Research Group does go on to say:

“The model of social engagement of the religious right is largely exhausted and discredited. But it is not the crackup of religious conservatism; it’s the maturation of religious conservatism. It’s not something new; it’s something old and noble – as old as abolition, as old as the Scriptures. And this change has the potential to raise new issues and build new alliances that will change the American political landscape.” http://pewforum.org/events/?EventID=184#new

New alliances they say? New alliances like:

“We thank God for the courageous actions of those Primates and provinces who have offered orthodox oversight to churches under false leadership, especially in North and South America. The actions of these Primates have been a positive response to pastoral necessities and mission opportunities. We believe that such actions will continue to be necessary and we support them in offering help around the world. “ GAFCON Final Statement

We now have in our midst the Global South. The Church of Uganda controls several parishes in Virginia. The Church of Nigeria controls several more and our own inimitable Archbishop Gregory Venables controls parishes in California. We also know that the likes of Americans have fully endorsed this statement. John David Schofield, Bishop Iker, Bishop Duncan, “Bishop” Minns and many, many more. Some GAFCON attendees were disappointed that the statement did not include a comment/decree on pro-life or actually, anti-abortion statements (Apparently divorce and polygamy are still okay). While not to get mired in the specific political issues, clearly many attendees at GAFCON wanted a much more political statement but those ideas were held in check --- for the moment.

Sooooo, we now have bishops and Archbishops with no knowledge or background of the socio-political environment of the United States. Having had several discussions with a retired bishop from Uganda I am further alarmed at the lack of knowledge these folks possess of the way in which we do our ordinary business in the Uniteid States. (BTW, I can hardly wait for our folks who have crossed the line to get to their first convention only to discover that when these guys said they spoke for the 35 million people they represent they meant ONLY these guys speak for the 35 million).

In fact the GAFCON statement goes on to talk about the 1662 prayer book!

“We rejoice in our Anglican sacramental and liturgical heritage as an expression of the gospel, and we uphold the 1662 Book of Common Prayer as a true and authoritative standard of worship and prayer, to be translated and locally adapted for each culture.” GAFCON Statement

I know everyone can count but that prayer book pre-dates our own prayer book by a couple of years. So, what is the big deal? Well, should this continue and with the money and power they gain everyday my question is how long before we elect another George W. Bush (type), hold a constitutional convention and decide to re-write the first ten amendments? Think I am kidding; California is now facing a Constitutional amendment on LGBT marriage.

If you think this can’t happen in your hometown, think again!