Saturday, August 16, 2008

The backpedaling continues

Read on to see what happens even to longtime loyal priests in this diocese when they embarrass Bishop Jack Iker. These four senior priests of the diocese -- all of whom have been staunch supporters and defenders of Bishop Iker - obviously believed they had his support in making their proposal to the Roman Catholic bishop. They would never have done something that serious unless they believed that.

The negative reaction from the people of the diocese must have been beyond enormous to cause the bishop to demand this public a retraction and have it issued at 9:42 p.m. on a Saturday night. But after all, what are four longtime friends when it comes to saving face?

Sent: Saturday, August 16, 2008 9:42 PM
Cc: Bishop Iker
Subject: Ad Clerum: Statement

To the clergy,

The following statement has been released jointly by Canon Charles Hough, Fr. William Crary, Fr. Christopher Stainbrook, and Fr. Louis Tobola in reference to the document released earlier this week concerning a June meeting between them and Bishop Kevin Vann.

Bishop Iker and the Standing Committee have asked that it be conveyed to you via Ad Clerum. It will be sent to all convention delegates and alternates as well.

Suzanne Gill


From: Fathers Crary, Hough, Stainbrook, and Tobola

Date: August 16, 2008

To: The Clergy and People of the Diocese

We wish to emphasize:
1. That the documents and our conversation with Bishop Vann solely ever
represented the four priests named.
2. In retrospect, we regret our choice of timing for starting these
3. We deeply regret the phraseology of the
document which has caused hurt and division.
4. We remain fully committed to the goal of this Diocese, as plainly
stated by Bishop Iker, to realign with an Orthodox Anglican Province.

Respectfully submitted,
The Very Rev. William A Crary, Jr.
The Rev. Canon Charles A. Hough, III
The Very Rev. Christopher C. Stainbrook
The Rev. Louis L. Tobola, Jr.


Joseph F said...

This is kind of sad, actually. While many posters on the last Fort Worth article argued that there was no motive other than a true belief in Catholic dogma, this letter seems to show otherwise.

If these priests seriously thought Roman Catholicism was the "one holy catholic and apostolic church," then why are they backpedaling now? Surely Rome won't look too kindly on that waffling. Either the Bishop of Rome is the infallible successor to Saint Peter and Christ's Vicar, or he isn't. If they truly believed in the claims of the Roman church, why not convert? If they truly believed that there was no future for Anglicanism, why stay?

It all seems way to opportunistic.

Frank Remkiewicz aka “Tree” said...

Can someone please explain what is happening with out clergy? From Bishops on down there seems to be a moral vacuum. Bishops raid parishes, diocese and provinces. Priests are in or out or lie about whether they are in or out or lie about the lying about whether they are in or out. Hows about we all promise to just pray about our predicaments and then talk from the centee of those prayers answered. What a refreshing change.

Caminante said...

Somewhat OT... as one who is fluent in French (medieval and modern) and Spanish, and studied German, Latin, Classical Greek and biblical Hebrew, all of which is to say I love languages, I still find it weird to read missives to the FW clergy addressed as 'Ad Clerum.' Why the Latin? How many other diocesans address the clergy that way?

airedale said...

Why should we believe anything the Bishop or his minions tell us at this point? I truly believe the problems in Ft Worth are clergy/bishop driven/induced. Most lay people simply want to do what the rest of TEC does (worship in peace, harmony and love) without all these distractions.