Gee, Bishop Iker..isn't there anything you like?

Here is what Bishop Jack Iker has to say about the Primatial Vicar thing: "

The primates responded to the appeals for Alternative Primatial Oversight from several dioceses by agreeing to establish a Pastoral Council that will oversee the ministry of a Primatial Vicar, who will in effect act as the Presiding Bishop for those who are unable to accept the ministry of Katharine Jefferts Schori. There are several problems with this proposal, and it raises some serious questions that warrant further discussion. "

"There are several problems...." I'll say. But Bishop Iker, I don't think your problems with it are mine.

Oh, and by the way, its Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori, even if you don't think she can be a bishop.


  1. The really unbelievable thing about this is that, as I understand it, the Episcopal Diocese of Forth Worth didn't even exist when TEC began ordaining women.

    So why do these guys think they have any sort of standing in this matter, again? The arrogance is simply stunning.

  2. Most of us in the Diocese of Fort Worth have the same problem as our Bishop. And one of our main problems is Ms. Schori. For you she may be bishop, for me she is not. And, most certainly, she is not our solution, nor does she appear to have any solutions for us.

    And, BTW, we do exist now, and we will continue to exist and to hold our beliefs. That's not arrogance; that's simple fact.

  3. Richard III21/2/07 6:28 AM

    Do you supppose +Iker is one of those nasty minded little people ++KJS spoke of in her homily when she was invested in November?

  4. And The Rt. Rev. Dr. Jefferts Schori IS a bishop - the Presiding Bishop. That too is a simple fact. Your repeated denials that she is a bishop does not make it so, but is only wishful thinking. That is a simple fact. That you refuse to acknowledge this betrays your utter denial of anything understood as Episcopal or Anglican. That is a simple fact. Refusing to accept reality is called pathological denial. That is a simple fact.

  5. And oops, the simple fact is, I should not have said the Rt. Rev. Schori, but the VERY Rev. Dr. Schori. No, wait. It's the MOST Rev. Dr. Schori. I simply must get a handle on our vernacular, just like other must get a handle on reality.

  6. christopher+21/2/07 9:00 AM

    Sioux is quite correct that the Diocese of Fort Worth exists, and that this is a fact.

    But, Sioux, it is also a fact that the Episcopal Church, by virtue of which the Diocese of Fort Worth exists, ordains women to all orders of ministry - Bishops, Priests and Deacons - in most places and that your concern with regard to the Presiding Bishop is apparently not some issue of theological diagreement with her personally, but the very fact that she is a woman, like many, many other Bishops, Priests and Deacons in this and other Provinces of the Anglican Communion. How would you have this resolved?

    The Primates - only one of whom is currently a woman, but that will likely change over time - are working for the Episcopal Church to remain a single Province, so not even they - diverse in their opinions as they are - have suggested creating a place where only men could be ordained. So, again, what would serve adequately to address the concern you raise?

  7. Women were ordained in 1976. The Diocese of Ft Worth came into existence in 1983. Iker became a bishop and reaffirmed his loyalty to the "doctine, discipline and worship of the Episcopal Church" in 1993.

    Was he not aware that he was affirming loyal to the doctrine and discipline of a body that ordained women?

  8. "And The Rt. Rev. Dr. Jefferts Schori IS a bishop - the Presiding Bishop."

    And the seven sons of Sceva thought they could establish themselves to cast out demons. Just because men presume to do something, that does not mean they have the authority to do it.

    That TEC has established KJS as a bishop is not in dispute. That she functions in the temporal capacity of a bishop is also not in dispute. What stands disputed is whether either can be established by any divine authority.

    It is simply a strawman to suggest this argument is nothing more than a denial of reality. This is the question: Is KJS in fact a bishop, or simply a pretender? How she functions in TEC is not relevant to this question.


  9. well,sioux, it's indeed arrogance, and you and Bp Iker should be ashamed of yourselves.

    As the Presiding Bishop said in her interview after Tanzania,

    Be of good faith. We’re entering Lent and there’s probably not a better time for us to receive this communiqué from the Primates’ Meeting. It will be hard news for a number of members of this Church; it will be welcome news for other members of this Church. This is a season to remember who is the focus of our faith and it is not we ourselves.

  10. Anonymous Carl,

    Resolve your disputed question in relation to Bishop Iker and you will have that dispute clarified in relation to the Most Rev. Dr. Jefferts Schori, Prediing Bishop of The Episcopal Church.

  11. Whether Katherine Jefferts Schori is a bishop or not is a question of authority. From whom does a bishop receive his authority and when is it validly conferred? There is no question that Jefferts Schori ACTS as a bishop, but is she really one?

    Obviously Jefferts Schori's election is a major break from tradition. Until her, there was never been a woman elected to head an apostolic church. Even if the Episcopal Church changed its canon to allow for a woman primate, would this rewrite catholic tradition from which the canons stem from? The answer is a big no.

    The Orthodox Church doesn't recognize her as one. The Catholic Church need not say a word. The popes have said a woman can never become a priest and even if it declared Anglican Orders void, the was willing to accept the possibility that Anglican bishops and priests have valid orders.

    Jefferts Schori is not even received as a bishop by her own church as a whole. Many Anglican primates don't consider her as a bishop. That's is the cost of breaking from tradition.

  12. I am a lay woman in the Diocese of Fort Worth, a convert to the Episcopal Church, confirmed in this diocese, and presently serving as a Eucharistic minister. Since I live at the very edge of the diocese, I could have chosen to go to a church in our neighboring diocese, but I choose not to. I consider myself fortunate to be in a diocese that upholds traditional Anglican values, and I am dismayed and saddened by the increasing moral compromises that have taken hold of the national church. I do not have any problem with having Bp Iker as my own bishop. I am a traditionalist (and an Anglo-Catholic), and if I couldn't be in a traditionalist Episcopal diocese, I would be in the Roman Catholic Church.

    I have had my own personal issues with the national church since 2003. I firmly don't think anyone who is not married should be in a sexual relationship. I am a single woman, and joyfully have chosen to remain celibate until and unless I marry. I also believe marriage, by definition, is between a man and a woman. So my problem is that a priest not only was not disciplined for being in a sexual relationship outside of marriage, but this priest was open about it, proud of it, and on top of that, he was made a bishop while he was still pursuing this "lifestyle." This is, to me, a blatant example of how fall the national church has fallen, that so many would think that is OK. So now, we have a presiding bishop (gender aside) who also condones and applauds this. Forget the fact that she is a woman. I simply can't be obedient to her interpretation of doctrines that have been held by the church for centuries.


OK... Comments, gripes, etc welcomed, but with comment moderation but with some cautions and one rule:
Cautions: Calling people fools, idiots, etc, will be reason to bounce your comment. Keeping in mind that in the struggles it is difficult enough to try to respect opponents, we should at least try.