Re: Interesting post on Canon Heidt's blog

[Louie Crew <lcrew@andromeda.rutgers.edu>]

Of course John-David Schofield is still a bishop, and not just a bishop
vagrante.  The majority of the delegates to the convention of the Diocese of
San Joaquin voted to leave TEC with him, as have many others in that
diocese.  The primate of the Southern Cone welcomed him and his flock.

I don't approve of what JDS did, but I gain nothing by denying him the
title "Bishop."

I stopped professing 7 years ago, but I am still Professor.  Like tattoos,
vocations may fade but they are indelible, especially after the 44
years I spent in the classroom and the 44 years JDS has spent in the
priesthood/bishopric.

I don't cease to be a professor just because someone disagrees with what I
profess.  The Anglican Province of the Southern Cone will still recognize
JDS as a bishop even if our House of Bishops deposes him as a TEC bishop. (I
hope they will.)  TEC's Church Pension Fund may or may not choose to send
him his checks as "Mr. JD Schofield", but they still must send the checks.
That's the law, as it should be.  A pension is not a gift:  we who are
entitlted to them earned them. I personally hope CPF will send the check
to "Bp. JD Schofield" or any varient now their wont with all other retirees.

"Bishop" and "Professor" are titles, not honorifics. Considering how badly
some perform who hold those titles, bishops and professors need to strive
very hard to bring more honor to the titles than the titles can bring to
their holders.

Louie