Posted on 05/03/2006 5:19:00 PM PDT by sionnsar
Way back in history, an observer interested in the election of James Mathes as Bishop of San Diego stumbled over this blog and asked if I knew anything about him. I had to reply that the new bish's career in Chicago began after my connection to official ECUSA churches had frayed to the breaking point, but I noted the red flags: that his entire career had been under Bishops Griswold and Persell, uncompromising revisers, and that he had been involved in clergy deployment. The bishop's influence over clergy transitions is maybe the chief vehicle for transforming the character of a diocese. The question was not, "what side is he on?" but whether he would come among his more traditional parishes as a ramping and a roaring lion, or as the slave of all. That question seems to have been answered. I am James, hear me roar.
One of the parts of Bishop Mathes' nasty little "Pastoral Directive" to his clergy that I relish the most is the language in paragraph two
Actions taken in any way . . . to affiliate with any persons or entities beyond the canonically constituted order provided by this Church is understood to be an effort that . . . will undermine the mission for which we have been created.
While the remainder of the Pastoral Direction does not specifically state that affiliation with the Network on FiF/NA or any other group is prohibited under the Direction, the bishop clearly retains the option to make joining the Network grounds for inhibition. As others have noted, this is a lawyer's letter, not a bishop's. Intimidation is the goal.
Traditional Anglican ping, continued in memory of its founder Arlin Adams.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.