Sunday, July 26, 2009

When the going gets tough... ACNA stays silent.

There are two types of leaders in this world: those not afraid to meet adversity head on, and those who pretend everything’s fine, and that the problem (“what problem?”) will eventually just disappear. Similarly, in times of trouble some leaders bring out the best in those under their command; inspiring them to respond with courage and brilliance they never knew they had. And on the other hand there are ACNA leaders.

Sadly little Bobby Duncan is an ACNA leader. It was last Thursday that the godless Superior Court of California (County of Fresno, Central Division) decreed that property theft is wrong - even if one is as doctrinally pure (because of one’s homophobia, as well as the fact that, unlike the Presiding Bishop and women in general, one’s genitalia are nominally male) as little layman John-David Schofield. That’s right, last Thursday! The apostates whom God in an act of obvious divine folly chose to bless with the return of that which is rightfully theirs issued a press release the following day, after which I prayerfully responded here, conveying my utter dismay that such archaic notions as truth and reality should have swayed the Court’s decision.

But from little Bobby? NOTHING!! Nothing last Friday, and still nothing as I write these wise words of encouragement to you, my Dearly Beloved sinners.

Nor has there been a word from little Bishop Venalballs. As Primate of the Southern Cone, and Grand Bullwinkle of layman Schofield and the pretence that was his empire, one might have expected at least something from the post-colonial Englishman bringing Christianity to a few million Spanish-speakers. Yet he’s also proven to be nothing more than an ACNA leader, despite offering an assurance of his favourite failed thief's “good standing and favour with me and this Province”, regardless that he “may have heard negative things about your ministries and orders from some quarters” (to whom could ++Venalballs possibly be referring?).

Meanwhile Viagraville is still giving pole-position to the pleasant subject of banning, while the luscious Sarah Hey has started a thread indicating she shares Bishop Quinine’s admiration of the Spartans, although I suspect she doesn’t know as much about them as he does. Little David Virtue and the rest are no different: mostly still whining about a convention that is, after all, so last fortnight, and none of them have girded their loins to fight for their now impoverished fellow schismatic. Which is not, of course, to say they haven’t girded their loins on a fairly regular basis: I know for a fact Dobby Ould does so every time Lord Volderjensen permits him to take a bath; just that nobody’s been prepared to give them a special girding for San Joaquin.

Which is, quite frankly, disgraceful. At times like this a true leader should be offering some rhetoric about ‘property not having mattered to Our Lord, nor to St. Paul, Wesley, or Whitefield, and not mattering to us either”. Except, of course, that the fellows this ruling hits hardest aren’t renown for their admiration for any of those gentlemen, and I’m not sure Cardinal Newman was into the ‘preaching in the fields and marketplaces’ thing. But still, my point stands, and any time layman Schofield wants to see a how a real leader would guide his flock through this mess he’s only got to contact me.

For an appropriate fee (cash or parish silverware melted down into unidentifiable ingots only, and definitely no checks from anyone associated with ACNA) I’ll be happy to show him how it’s done. My help won’t be cheap, but I guarantee it won’t cost anywhere near as much as little Bobby’s advice has cost so far – which in my estimation is pretty much everything layman Schofield has ever had. Not that any of his brethren in ACNA seem to care.

I'm Father Christian and I teach the Bible.


Leonardo Ricardo said...

See, it´s true, I´m quite often ¨right¨ in all that I say and do: Fr. Christian Troll for Presiding Bishop and Leader for Life!

He knows stuff!

Finally, the truth is known!

Lapinbizarre said...

".... post-colonial Englishman bringing Christianity to a few million Spanish-speakers." I believe, Fr Christian, that within its canonically defined border, PB Venables' province consists of no more than 20,000 to 30,000 communicants. Evangelization of the Spanish-speaking is not, it seems, a priority. Anyway,it's not as it most of these people are the type with whom one could take post-conversion afternoon tea. Holy Communion is one thing, but really! Best leave 'em to the Fundigelicals. So much easier to be a poacher than to be a fisher of men. Maybe Mark Sanford, nominally an Episcopalian, swells their ranks while in Buenos Aires on safari.

Pity Sarah's Spartan musings are not at a site where one can give her the kidding she so deserves. Too many bloggers live on the same one-way street when it comes to taking like a man that which they so love to dole out.

Lapinbizarre said...

Rowan has just issued a statement on the GC resolutions and their impact on the AC. I haven't the patience right now - and probably never - but from skimming it, it's clearly not going to delight the FOCAs. Has he realized yet that the uniformity of voting in both Houses of GC on DO25 and CO56 indicates that TEC is unlikely to touch any version of a Covenant with a ten foot pole?

Daniel271 said... wise and cunning as you are, I'm surprised that you are opposed to the strategy of banning. Sarah and Matt and all their profoundly intelligent and Christ-like friends like Jackie and my idol Greg are simply following the well known rule that success lies in listening only to people who agree with you. Just like "W", they don't want to get caught in the trap of "reality based thinking"; it can so distract one from one's goals.

gerry said...

"Has he realized yet that the uniformity of voting in both Houses of GC on DO25 and CO56 indicates that TEC is unlikely to touch any version of a Covenant with a ten foot pole?"

I've read Cantuar's Letter twice and am convinced he realizes and is resigned to GC2012 voting down his Covenant.

Why else would he talk about a two track Communion? Basicly a track of Lambeth Legalism vs. one in the Spirit of Traditional Aglicanism.

Leonardo Ricardo said...

++Rowan only materialized once at The Episcopal Church (not counting his snide flyby in New Orleans when he pretended his ears were matted inside and he couldn´t hear properly also couldn´t actually see a fellow +human being). The man vaporizes after offering whimpy´s a pattern I recognized it right now...Big Pete knew it earlier (someone in Newport Beach, California turned him on).

When is the REAL Queen going to have a little chat with this mad and wildly hairy thing?

Lapinbizarre said...

Careful, Leonardo, you're teetering on the verge of StandFirm fantasy land. There are several folks over there who get worked into a lather every so often, inventing royal intervention scenarios. Notwithstanding her "Supreme Governor" title, which carries about as much reality as the Pope's pagan high priest's title, Pontifex Maximus, there's not a damned thing HM can do about this situation, even if she wants to.

Sarah Hey, explaining her lack of interest in ACNA's bishop-making proces - she's determined to stick with TEC, come Hell or High Water, and more power to her - said "I have no interest, honestly, in what Nigeria or Uganda do in selecting their bishops, any more than I have an interest in how the COE selects its bishops; otherwise I'd be hoping that the ACNA would also introduce a Queen somewhere in the mix." Sarah need not worry, there will be Queens aplenty.

David |Dah • veed| said...

I think that they are ignoring the court decision because the Curmudgeon has told them this ruling is naught because it is regarding the plaintiff's (Dio San Walkin & TEC) 2nd amended complaint, which was superseded awhile ago by the plaintiffs 4th amended complaint.

So the judge was just completing meaningless paperwork that insures him a paycheck. CA law says that he does not get paid if he has outstanding decisions of more than 90 days.

Anonymous said...

+Boob is probably working on the new fundraising letter.

The Rev. Dr. Christian Troll said...

Ah yes... no judge is ever as qualified as a middle-tier attorney acting on behalf of a losing party. I especially like the line "...if the Court of Appeals corrects Judge Corona's decision as it should..."; nobody ever throws the word if around as lavishly as a losing mouthpiece.

Certainly this judgement isn't the last word, but you can be sure when that word comes it will have taken this finding into account. In the meantime I wonder if Mr. Happy will take into account the suggestion of his commenter dgn13, who cites Calvin as evidence the Church is not hierarchical.

While Calvin isn't the first person who springs to mind when one looks at little layman Schofield's churchmanship, it's sure to convince the court. "Of course," the judge will cry, " a 21st century hierarchical church in the U.S. can't possibly be hierarchical, because the 16th century leader of a presbyterian church in Geneva said the Holy Spirit doesn't like the notion of hierarchy."

Mmmm - they breed 'em sharp on Mr. Happy's side of the schism.

Pete said...

"...superseded awhile ago by the plaintiffs 4th amended complaint."

I chuckled at the Texas claim that the judge's work writing a 21 page Ruling was of no significance as it only dealt with the Second Amended Complaint.

A busy trial court judge in the California Superior Court (all 58 countys' courts are state employees now, no longer county employees), especially in a large city such as Fresno, rarely has time to write a lenghty and well researched opinion such as issued by Judge Adolfo F. Corona. With a full calendar each day, to issue this type of opinion at the trial court level is very rare, and thsi one is of appellate level quality. A judge would not take on this challenge merely to clear up backed up paperwork to assure issuance of his paycheck.

A reading of the actual ruling shows that on page 3 the judge addressed and quickly "dispatched" the defendant's claim of mootness due to the subsequent filing of a Fourth Amended Complaint:

"Subsequent to oral argument, defendants have suggested in a letter brief to this court that this motion has been mooted by the filing of the Fourth Amended Complaint, as this motion was brought when the allegations of the Second Amended Complaint were active. However, neither the intervening Third Amended Complaint, which was filed before oral argument, nor the current Fourth Amended Complaint, have changed the allegations of the first cause of action as to which summary adjudication is sought. The motion is not moot."

"Defendants' authority, Perry v. Atkinson (1987) Cal.3d 14 does not suggest otherwise. In that case, summary adjudication was granted on a first amended complaint although leave had been granted to file a second amended complaint amending the very cause of action on which summary adjudication was granted. (Id. at p. 18)Accordingly, Perry is distinguishable.

I suppose one could hang their hat on this issue while digging around for something to justify an appeal.

Lawyers still get paid by the hour for counting angels dancing on the head of a pin.

HB said...

Curmudgeon lives in his very own convoluted, "I wish it, therefore it is", fantasy land, David. His legal prognostications have a lousy track track, but what he writes sounds authoritative to the ever grasping at straws SF crowd, many of whom who cleave to it as gospel.

David |Dah • veed| said...

Please do not anyone mistake my poor grasp of using English as meaning I subscribe to the Curmudgeon's POV. I only offered it as a reason why the Orthodite remain quiet. They highly value his pontifications about the law and the current cases of relevance. Whenever he has an emission they flock to it like flies to shit!

Fr Craig said...

late to the party as always... but, Fr. C, why do we no longer hear about that great and holy Nigerian Primate? He couldn't keep his mouth shut for months, now I begin to miss his comedic statements...

Anonymous said...

That is true. It has been many a moon since Akinola embarrassed us with his humility.

Grandmère Mimi said...

It has been many a moon since Akinola embarrassed us with his humility.

LOL! Indeed, where is Pete? Could it be that he no longer serves their purposes, and his handlers dumped him?

Anon, surely you should sign a name, any name, to such witty and clever commentary.

Pete said...

Perhaps Akinola has been kidnapped by a roving Nigerian band of thugs who mistook him for an Oil Company Executive . . . or they may know exactly who he is and plan to shake down his new wealthy American churches for ransom?

david virtue's bountiful bosom said...

That was I, Grandmère.

The Rev. Dr. Christian Troll said...

My dear Dah-veed - your English is much clearer and more precise than ++Cantaur's, and I never for a moment thought you were advocating Mr. Happy's delusion. On the contrary, I appreciate your having introduced his perspective to our discourse.

As for Big Pete Akinola, little layman Minns has undoubtedly been busy with the shredder with respect to passing on his pronouncements. This has, however, been greatly exacerbated by a sudden financial crisis - predicted here six months ago - caused by a drastic reduction in funds from Jensenland: Big Pete has been put on a diet with respect to air travel.

David |Dah • veed| said...

I think that Big Pete is quiet, because Big Pete is through with the lot of us. He was quite tame at the last Primate's Party on the Mediterranean beaches of Alexandria. There were rumors circulating soon after the affair that he would not be attending anymore.

Perhaps he has quietly moved on to the Lion-of-Nigeria-based Anglican Orthodite Brotherhood. No one with kooties allowed!

Lapinbizarre said...

Maybe his handlers have him on Propofol, David.

David G. said...

Maybe his handlers have him on Propofol..

We can only hope that one of MJ's handlers will accept a job in Nigeria, so the job can be done properly!!