To Beryl, and others
March 27, 2008 by rgeaton
Beryl,
Why don’t you ask me some questions and I’ll try to respond. I’m posting in this manner right now because I lost a long response to the recesses of “clipboard.”
I will start though with a few comparable matches to what I know about you — I am 52 and the grandfather to 4. I have been the rector of the Episcopal parish in Tulare for 18 1/2 years.
Jesus is my Lord.
Taking this as an open invitation to all I’ll start. Will you be joining us in Lodi this weekend and participating in the convention? I for one hope you do join us and that we have you in our efforts to rebuild this Diocese.
Well Father Rob,
It does seem that the conflicts in this diocese are very sad because we are all just people, Christians, trying to live out the depth and love that is at the heart of Christianity, according to our own best understanding. So many people in this diocese have been hurt; Christian fellowship in so many churches has been splintered. I have said many times that the Episcopal Church is big enough for many voices, a reason why I chose this denomination 45 years ago. What has happened here did not need to have happened. I will even quote Father Dan Martins here, who noted that “conservatives” and “liberals” have been painting each other with a broad brush that is often inaccurate. You know what side I am on, but I will just say here that many of the things said about the presiding bishop and about “liberals” are exaggerations, and in some cases, untruths. We also need to remember that all of us are more than the labels. I repeat what I said at the beginning of this paragraph, we are real people, Christians, just doing our best.
I would like to know whether you supported the plan to take this diocese to the Southern Cone, whether you voted for the move at the December convention.
I think the letter you signed that went to Presiding Bishop Schori was inflammatory in the current circumstances. Perhaps that is because I appreciate what she is doing. I am part of a group in Turlock who left our church when the deposed priest was called to serve there. I was a member of the vestry at the time, and 5 members of the vestry left over the decision that was made, feeling that, in good conscience, we could not stay in those circumstances. We have worked hard since to hold our group together with no church, few prayer books, no hymnals, etc. It is like starting from scratch, but we are growing anyway, and there is new heart and life in what we are doing. What we are doing is taking a stand for what we believe in.
I see other churches in our diocese that are also split, some just embarking on the journey that began for us months ago, and it is tragic. Certainly Christians who love the Epsicopal Church and want to stay with it are very grateful for the support we are getting from Presiding Bishop Schori and the national church. We need new Ecclesiastical structure brought to this diocese. We need to be able to get on with the work of the church.
Fr. Rob,
I fully understand the need for those who wished to stay in TEc to group and get themselves on their path forward. Truly they are entitled to that. But, my question is and possibly an observation, why wouldn’t they want to do this correctly and canonically? Why would KJS, Bp. Lamb, and the Remain Episcopal’s press forward uncanonocally? With the accustions coming from that side to our side, (those of us who have moved to another province for temporary shelter), saying that what we did was against c & c’s even though we know that to not be true, it seems to be a bit of the pot calling the kettle black. As well, the wider body of the Anglican Communion sees and states that KJS & the HoB have violated the C’s & C’s of TEc and conitnue to do so. So why would RE and the Episcopal Dio. of San Joaquin even want to start out that way.? One would think that if they really want to show that they are right and we are wrong then wouldn’t one want to do it “right” and within the canons and constitution of TEc in order to be taken seriously and with respect?
T. Dillon,
I only want to say that no one wants to show that we are “right,” and you are “wrong.” That is not what this is about. We want the Episcopal Church to continue in this diocese.
Rob: My question is what will you and the others who would like to legitimately continue the TEC Diocese of San Joaquin do with respect to the non-canonical actions this weekend in Lodi to create a new non-canonical Diocese of Remain Episcopal? Will you participate? Show up and protest? Stay away?
Dear Father Rob,
This was a wonderful opportunity to engage in a true listening process. Alas, I am afraid that Beryl and others are not really interested in this at all. I found this at Jake’s place:
“I thank you so much for all your ongoing efforts to demand the truth. Honestly, it gets so tiresome to deal with individuals who have their own agenda which has to be to undermine the Episcopal Church in whatever way they can. Peace and blessings! I hope you are enjoying your new home!
Beryl Simkins”
Thanks, Robroy.
On the other hand, I was completely taken away from attention to this post, so whatever might have progressed prior to the meeting would have failed on my part.
Jamesw,
“I’ll be there.”
Beryl: I suppose my response to your comment “We want the Episcopal Church to continue in this diocese” is this - but don’t you want it to continue in an canonically valid manner? And second, Beryl, don’t you realize the severe jeapardy which the Presiding Bishop has placed the future of the Episcopal Church in San Joaquin by her rather flagrant abuse of the canonical process? And before you react defensively, Beryl, let me say that I, as a conservative, regard what the Presiding Bishop has done in the Diocese of San Joaquin and towards Bishop Schofield to be the very best result that I could have hoped for.
It is my educated belief (I have two law degrees and have written a law school thesis on Episcopal canon law) that what the Presiding Bishop has done is seriously undermine any legal claim that Jerry Lamb or the Episcopal Church will have on the properties of the Diocese of San Joaquin. I also think that had the Presiding Bishop scrupulously followed the canons she would now have a validly deposed Bishop Schofield, and a TEC Diocese of San Joaquin made up of both conservatives and liberals moving forward and in a good legal position to retain the diocesan property if the California Supreme Court adopted the heiearchical church legal theory in the pending Los Angeles district appeal.
I am not trying to be partisan here Beryl, but were I in your shoes I would be pressuring this new group meeting in Lodi to stop, put its plans on hold, and go back and do things properly and according to the canons. Trust me, it will be in your best interests and it will be in the interests of a united Episcopal Church. I don’t expect you will do so, but perhaps, a few years from now, when the courts rule as I expect they will, perhaps you will think back and wonder if the Presiding Bishop really did (and does) have your best interests in mind.
Rob: You truly are one of the bright lights shining in this whole mess. You will be in my prayers and I thank God that even in this mess, there are still people like you who can witness to what the Church is called to be.
Beryl Simkins,
If you read my post carefully to Fr. Rob Eaton you will see that I did not say anything about us being right or you being right or wrong. I said that if you and the Reamin Episcopal people and the PB wanted to do this reconstitution ofthe Episcopal Dio. in San Joaquin, then one would think that they would want to do it right as in follow their own Canon’s and Constitutions in deposing Bishop Schofield and Bishop Cox. Before moving forward. The fact is they did not an they didn’t even accept his resignation so in effect he is still “technically” the eccelestial authority in the Dio. Of San Joaquin no matter whether he sees himself that way or no. KJS, DBB, and the HoB’s botched the vote on both bishops. They need to fix that before proceding this weekend. But, it appears they feel they are above their own C’s & C’s. Sad really! SO. please I implore you to read a post and not twist the words to mean somethig else when in fact they were not said nor meant the wway you replied.
Blessings
Here’s how the described your visit at Jake’s blog:
“Things went very well. Rob Eaton showed up with 2 parishioners/vestry and complained. We listened respectfully. +Lamb is now the provisional bishop for EDoSJ. C and C rolled back to 2003. New SC and DC elected. Eucharist and seating to happen around 2. More later.”
“I’m curious about Eaton’s involvement. Were any other non-Episcopalians allowed seat and voice?
Lisa Fox | Homepage | 03.29.08 - 4:16 pm | #”
I will only say this, and I am truly done. My statement at Jake’s blog was very open and honest. If I were trying to hide it, I would hardly have been the first one who answered, and I would not have made that statment in a very open environment. May I say Robroy, that I also always give my name very openly. I have always said that if I have something to say, I will say it with full responsibility for what is said. I endured a lot of hostile reactions to my statements at Kendall Harmon’s site, but I will still speak my understanding and perception of the truth.
Father Rob, in my opinion, you and members of your church were treated with respect at convention, and I do know that was not an easy thing to do, to come there and take a stand.
I say again, and for the last time that I will speak at this site, I also love the Lord; I believe, like you that Jesus died for all our sins, and in such gracious, unbelievable, sacrificial love for us sinners. The Episcopal Church has room for many voices, and that is why I am faithful and loyal to this church.
I think the right thing to do Rob+ is for your church to have another vote in light of the blatant disregard for canon law. This is what Dan Martins+ had to say about the non-recognition of the standing committee…
“and the second count is simply a lie. I hate to make such a bald statement, but there’s no way around it. If the Standing Committee took any such disqualifying action, no one has yet named it. Quite the contrary, they took actions which clearly demonstrated their intention to act as the Standing Committee of the Episcopal Diocese.”
Fr. Eaton,
I know comments are moderated, and if you don’t want to publish this, that’s fine. This is really intended for you, but if you do decide to share it with the web community, that’s ok too.
Who am I? I am a parishioner at Holy Family church in Fresno. I was at the convention yesterday as an observer, not a delegate. I saw and heard your protest at the convention yesterday. Although I don’t agree with you, I respect that you took a principled position, and more importantly, that you showed up. I am sorry you chose not to participate further in the convention. I am also sorry you didn’t have your delegates nominate you for standing committee. Speaking to several people, I think there is a very good chance you would have been reelected.
That, however, is now water under the bridge. The question is looking forward, where do we go from here? I am writing not to lecture or preach to you, but to call you back into our community as your brother in Christ.
Despite your protests and beliefs, it is not going to change the result. Bishop Lamb is the provisional bishop, and there is a new standing committee. It seems your choices are to join us in moving forward, join Schofield’s efforts, or walk alone. I don’t really see any other options. And we are not meant to walk alone. Although we may differ on theology, I don’t think we differ on the church’s mission and worship. We have a lot of work to do in central California as a church, and we can do it better if we walk together. Let’s focus on where we agree, which is a lot, and get on with the work we have to do. We can do God’s work better if you are working with us than if you are sitting on the sidelines, or worrying about things that you can’t change.
My hope for the people in the pews, and the clergy, is that except for the people who will have to try to sort out the legal mess that Schofield created, the rest of us can put that aside and get on with the business of being a church. Please come with us.
My prayers are with you and your congregation.
That was a good letter. Unfortunately, choosing Lamb et al, is choosing lawsuits and lies. That is what the organization that was artificially constructed yesterday is designed to do.
Dear Father Eaton,
I, too, am a parishioner at Holy Family. I was a delegate there at convention yesterday. I went up to you and shook your hand and told you how glad I was that you came. I want to echo what Fresno Mark said. I was hoping that you would vest for the Eucharist. I saw you shake the PB’s hand and I thought that was very gracious of you.
I thought the principled stand that you and your parishioners took yesterday was admirable and courageous, and I wish there had been more response to it at the time.
I truly hoped that you would be nominated from the floor for the Standing Committee–I would have voted for you. The only reason I myself did not nominate you is that I did not know if you wished it–I seriously thought of doing it anyway.
There has been a great deal of controversy about the convention and the deposition. When the dust settles, it may be that we acted rightly, perhaps not, and will face the consequences. The only thing I can say with certainty about this is of, course, we could be wrong.
For those who have left with Bishop John-David, I understand why they have left, and I do not have any ill will to them, only blessings. I hope that in turn they will continue recognize us as fellow Christians and toilers in the vineyard. I admire and respect Father Carlos and will always consider him a dear friend.
In this type of controversy, there are rarely any winners. If it turns out in the long run that we lose our church buildings, so be it. We’ll find others.
My prayers for you, your parish, and for all God’s people.
“For those who have left with Bishop John-David, I understand why they have left, and I do not have any ill will to them, only blessings. I hope that in turn they will continue recognize us as fellow Christians and toilers in the vineyard.”
Thank you Aghaveagh!
I am one those who have left and I really appreciate your kind and thoughtful comments.
I, too, wish you and your church many blessings. We have one mission-Christ!
Ephesians 3:20
Walt,
Indeed–although I would say that you have not really left at all–not left the one true apostolic and catholic church, that is.
“we have one mission, Christ!”
Alleluia, alleluia, he is risen indeed!!
thank you for your graciousness.