MULTITASKING
Back in Fort Worth, the People’s Democratic Socialist Anglican Organization of the United States of Americahas another show trial, conviction and execution scheduled:
The episcopal defendants in the Fort Worth 7 case have been charged with fraud, financial misconduct and failing to inform on their fellow bishops who held opinions on church order contrary to those advocated by Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori.
For all intents and purposes, therunning dog lackeys defendants violated every canon in the book when they exercised their First Amendment rights.
In an email dated 2 Oct 2012 seen by Anglican Ink the Fort Worth 7 were informed of the specific canonical violations they had committed by filing an amicus brief in the Fort Worth case before the Texas Supreme Court.
Lenin’s Schori’s Dherzhinsky explains.
The intake officer for the House of Bishops, the Rt. Rev. F. Clayton Matthews told the seven:
“The complaints were filed by the Standing Committee of the Diocese of Fort Worth and Mr. Paul Ambos, a member in good standing of Christ Church, New Brunswick, New Jersey and a Deputy to the 77th General Convention from the Diocese of New Jersey. They allege you violated Canons IV.3.1, and Canons IV.4.Sec1(c),(e),(g),(f),(h)(6),(h)(8), and possibly IV.4.Sec.1(h)(2).”
To wit.
Canon IV.3.1
(a) knowingly violating or attempting to violate, directly or through the acts of another person, the Constitution or Canons of the Church or of any Diocese;
(b) failing without good cause to cooperate with any investigation or proceeding conducted under authority of this Title; or
(c) intentionally and maliciously bringing a false accusation or knowingly providing false testimony or false evidence in any investigation or proceeding under this Title.
Canon 4: Of Standards of Conduct
Sec. 1. In exercising his or her ministry, a Member of the Clergy shall:
(c) abide by the promises and vows made when ordained;
(e) safeguard the property and funds of the Church and Community;
(f) report to the Intake Officer all matters which may constitute an Offense as defined in Canon IV.2 meeting the standards of Canon IV.3.3, except for matters disclosed to the Member of Clergy as confessor within the Rite of Reconciliation of a Penitent;
(g) exercise his or her ministry in accordance with applicable provisions of the Constitution and Canons of the Church and of the Diocese, ecclesiastical licensure or commission and Community rule or bylaws;
(h) refrain from: (6) conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation; or (8) any Conduct Unbecoming a Member of the Clergy.
And possibly: IV.4.Sec.1(h)(2): holding and teaching publicly or privately, and advisedly, any Doctrine contrary to that held by the Church.
This just in: a practice universally considered sinful in the Word of God is not a Doctrine of the People’s Democratic Socialist Anglican Organization of the United States of America. Believing that the PDSAOUSA has exclusive title to every building and piece of real estate ever remotely associated with the PDSAOUSA, a practice not mentioned in the Word of God at all, is a law of the Medes and the Persians which altereth not.
All that just for signing their names to a piece of paper. By the by, chief prosecutorDherzhinsky Matthews will be one of the judges. Know who one of the other judges is going to be? Uh huh.
One of the accused told Anglican Ink that it was “intriguing that one party to a dispute (Katharine Jefferts Schori) should be able to determine that the other party (the Seven Bishops) has committed an offense by disagreeing with her.”
The Curmudgeon agrees.
Canon lawyer Allan Haley has noted the procedures used to investigate and try the bishops violate natural justice and U.S. legal procedures. He argued that it was axiomatic that an investigator not be a judge of his case or for a complainant be the judge of her own cause.
All together now.
So please don’t even bother writing yet another long and learned disquisition about how They Don’t Have The Authority To Do That!! Fact is, the Dear Leader does have the authority to do that. Know why?
Because NOBODY ever calls her out.
It wouldn’t matter if we did, Chris. She’d never be convicted. So what? At least the Dear Leader would have to canonically justify her actions and you’d be on record as opposing the Dear Leader’s dictatorship instead of looking like the scared cowards that you currently resemble.
A few weeks ago, Dan Martins, Bishop of Springfield and one of the Fort Worthrunning dog lackeys defendants, wrote this about Mark Lawrence.
While I am not fully on board with the some of the positions taken and decisions made by the conventions of the Diocese of South Carolina, and while I could find reasons to criticize the tone of much of the rhetoric coming from their direction, I am in essential theological sympathy with the witness made by that diocese as it has attempted to remain faithful to historic Anglican — which is to say, historic Episcopalian — faith and practice in a time when the majority in our church appear to be turning away from that tradition.
Guess what, Bishop? That slight distance you attempted to put between yourself and Bishop Lawrence there is not going to save you. The Dear Leader means to have your professional head and, as this farce of a trial indicates to anybody with a functional brain, the Dear Leader will have your professional head.
But you knew that a long time ago or you should have known it. I guess it’s kind of like swimming with sharks, Dan. A shark might not take a bite of you right away but eventually a shark is going to take a bite out of you. It’s what sharks do.
So when the Dear Leader drops the hammer, don’t expect a great deal of sympathy from this site. Because I’m tapped out, Dan.
The episcopal defendants in the Fort Worth 7 case have been charged with fraud, financial misconduct and failing to inform on their fellow bishops who held opinions on church order contrary to those advocated by Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori.
For all intents and purposes, the
In an email dated 2 Oct 2012 seen by Anglican Ink the Fort Worth 7 were informed of the specific canonical violations they had committed by filing an amicus brief in the Fort Worth case before the Texas Supreme Court.
The intake officer for the House of Bishops, the Rt. Rev. F. Clayton Matthews told the seven:
“The complaints were filed by the Standing Committee of the Diocese of Fort Worth and Mr. Paul Ambos, a member in good standing of Christ Church, New Brunswick, New Jersey and a Deputy to the 77th General Convention from the Diocese of New Jersey. They allege you violated Canons IV.3.1, and Canons IV.4.Sec1(c),(e),(g),(f),(h)(6),(h)(8), and possibly IV.4.Sec.1(h)(2).”
To wit.
Canon IV.3.1
(a) knowingly violating or attempting to violate, directly or through the acts of another person, the Constitution or Canons of the Church or of any Diocese;
(b) failing without good cause to cooperate with any investigation or proceeding conducted under authority of this Title; or
(c) intentionally and maliciously bringing a false accusation or knowingly providing false testimony or false evidence in any investigation or proceeding under this Title.
Canon 4: Of Standards of Conduct
Sec. 1. In exercising his or her ministry, a Member of the Clergy shall:
(c) abide by the promises and vows made when ordained;
(e) safeguard the property and funds of the Church and Community;
(f) report to the Intake Officer all matters which may constitute an Offense as defined in Canon IV.2 meeting the standards of Canon IV.3.3, except for matters disclosed to the Member of Clergy as confessor within the Rite of Reconciliation of a Penitent;
(g) exercise his or her ministry in accordance with applicable provisions of the Constitution and Canons of the Church and of the Diocese, ecclesiastical licensure or commission and Community rule or bylaws;
(h) refrain from: (6) conduct involving dishonesty, fraud, deceit or misrepresentation; or (8) any Conduct Unbecoming a Member of the Clergy.
And possibly: IV.4.Sec.1(h)(2): holding and teaching publicly or privately, and advisedly, any Doctrine contrary to that held by the Church.
This just in: a practice universally considered sinful in the Word of God is not a Doctrine of the People’s Democratic Socialist Anglican Organization of the United States of America. Believing that the PDSAOUSA has exclusive title to every building and piece of real estate ever remotely associated with the PDSAOUSA, a practice not mentioned in the Word of God at all, is a law of the Medes and the Persians which altereth not.
All that just for signing their names to a piece of paper. By the by, chief prosecutor
The member of the reference panel to which Bishops Matthews, the investigator, forwarded the complaint for judgment includes Bishop Matthews, Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori, and retired Bishop Dorsey Henderson.
A fact which elicited this wry comment from one of the running dog lackeys defendants.
One of the
The Curmudgeon agrees.
Canon lawyer Allan Haley has noted the procedures used to investigate and try the bishops violate natural justice and U.S. legal procedures. He argued that it was axiomatic that an investigator not be a judge of his case or for a complainant be the judge of her own cause.
All together now.
YA THINK?!!
At this point, one would have to have a heart of stone to read stories like this without laughing. Actually expecting genuine legality from the People’s Democratic Socialist Anglican Organization of the United States moved beyond stupid a long time ago.So please don’t even bother writing yet another long and learned disquisition about how They Don’t Have The Authority To Do That!! Fact is, the Dear Leader does have the authority to do that. Know why?
Because NOBODY ever calls her out.
It wouldn’t matter if we did, Chris. She’d never be convicted. So what? At least the Dear Leader would have to canonically justify her actions and you’d be on record as opposing the Dear Leader’s dictatorship instead of looking like the scared cowards that you currently resemble.
A few weeks ago, Dan Martins, Bishop of Springfield and one of the Fort Worth
While I am not fully on board with the some of the positions taken and decisions made by the conventions of the Diocese of South Carolina, and while I could find reasons to criticize the tone of much of the rhetoric coming from their direction, I am in essential theological sympathy with the witness made by that diocese as it has attempted to remain faithful to historic Anglican — which is to say, historic Episcopalian — faith and practice in a time when the majority in our church appear to be turning away from that tradition.
Guess what, Bishop? That slight distance you attempted to put between yourself and Bishop Lawrence there is not going to save you. The Dear Leader means to have your professional head and, as this farce of a trial indicates to anybody with a functional brain, the Dear Leader will have your professional head.
But you knew that a long time ago or you should have known it. I guess it’s kind of like swimming with sharks, Dan. A shark might not take a bite of you right away but eventually a shark is going to take a bite out of you. It’s what sharks do.
So when the Dear Leader drops the hammer, don’t expect a great deal of sympathy from this site. Because I’m tapped out, Dan.
No comments:
Post a Comment