[Magdalen] EC v. ED of Ft. Worth

[Lynn Ronkainen]

sad all around... I do think that in the long run, the return of the 
diocesan offices/camps etc are more important than the return of everything 
if a space is provided for some kind of compromise between the parties 
themselves or between judge and judgment.

In many ways, these kind of legal struggles heighten, for me, the vast 
social changes afoot during the lifetime of the 'boomer' generation since 
the mid 40s or a little bit before that. They also make me think more and 
more about 'what doing church' really is... and if God is gently and not so 
much, nudging us waaaay out of our comfort zone and more into the world, to 
do God's work.

Still mourning for the history and spirituality of what is bound up so much 
in all of these proceedings

Lynn

website: www.ichthysdesigns.com

When I stand before God at the end of my life I would hope that I have not a 
single bit of talent left and could say, "I used everything You gave me." 
attributed to Erma Bombeck

Thomas Merton writes, “People may spend their whole lives climbing the 
ladder of success only to find, once they reach the top, that the ladder is 
leaning against the wrong wall.”

"What you seek is seeking you." - Rumi

--------------------------------------------------
From: "Ginga Wilder" <gingawilder at gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, November 03, 2014 12:16 PM
To: "Magdalen" <magdalen at herberthouse.org>
Subject: Re: [Magdalen] EC v. ED of Ft. Worth

> This USSC decision to reject the case will mark the path forward for
> TECSC.  And, we in new missions and worshipping communities now know that
> we won’t have our buildings back anytime soon, if at all.  That fact will
> be hard for some to grasp, but I do believe it is the truth.   As I have
> thought all along, these cases will not be settled in my lifetime.
>
>
>
> Very sad, and all Episcopalians must grieve our loss, and then create a 
> new
> faith community, looking forward, rather than hold to the stuff of the
> past.  That is my opinion.  History will happen, and at some point in the
> more distant future, the Lawrence church may fail and their buildings, 
> etc.
> may have to be sold.
>
>
> In these days of a dwindling TEC, not having the burden of upkeep of old
> buildings may be a gift to fledgling congregation.  I do still want the
> intellectual and real diocesan (not parish) property returned sooner 
> rather
> than later.
>
>
>
> Ginga
>
> On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 10:43 AM, Charles Wohlers <
> charles.wohlers at verizon.net> wrote:
>
>> I believe it means they refused to hear the case, meaning the lower court
>> ruling stands.
>>
>> Chad Wohlers
>> about to head back North from sunny Florida,
>> Woodbury, VT USA
>> chadwohl at satucket.com
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message----- From: Grace Cangialosi
>> Sent: Monday, November 03, 2014 10:18 AM
>> To: magdalen at herberthouse.org
>> Subject: Re: [Magdalen] EC v. ED of Ft. Worth
>>
>> I'm sorry, but I don't know what this means.
>>
>>  On Nov 3, 2014, at 9:51 AM, Roy Murphy <roy.murphy at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Cert denied. :(
>>>
>>>  On Mon, Nov 3, 2014 at 9:41 AM, Ginga Wilder <gingawilder at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> OK.  It's 9:30 am.  What's the story....yes, that is a ridiculous
>>>> inquiry.
>>>> But, members of TECSC are among those waiting on this decision. If USSC
>>>> takes the case and iff USSC decides on behalf of TEC, this will have
>>>> enormous impact on the South Carolina case.  I don't much care about
>>>> parish
>>>> real property issues, but I do indeed want our name, our symbols, our
>>>> trust
>>>> fund, our camp and conference center, our diocesan property ETC 
>>>> returned
>>>> to
>>>> Episcpalians.  Others in TECSC sincerely are invested in having the
>>>> parish
>>>> properties.
>>>>
>>>> SC awaits the decision of Circuit Court Judge Diane Goodstein in the
>>>> lawsuit where Bp Lawrence and his breakaway church is suing TEC and
>>>> TECSC.
>>>>
>>>> Ginga
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  On Sun, Nov 2, 2014 at 10:35 PM, Roy Murphy <roy.murphy at gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Did I say 11/1? Tomorrow at 9:30. My guess is that it gets relisted 
>>>>> for
>>>>> another conference. That has been their recent practice.
>>>>>
>>>>>  On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 12:03 PM, Roy Murphy <roy.murphy at gmail.com>
>>>>>>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>  The Supreme Court docket says the case was distributed for the 10/31
>>>>>> conference. We could hear further news on 11/1. Either grant, deny or
>>>>>> relist.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>