[Magdalen] EC v. ED of Ft. Worth

[Ginga Wilder]

Grace,
I cannot give sure answers for the Ft. Worth case.  Websites for each
entity call themselves Episcopal Diocese of Ft. W.

Iker's diocese:http://www.fwepiscopal.org/index1.php
TEC diocese:  http://episcopaldiocesefortworth.org/

Yes it is confusing...the labels are the same words BUT do not reflect the
same entities.  That takes a bit of searching.  This explains why we read
that The Episcopal Church is suing the Episcopal Diocese of Ft. W.

In SC, with the schism, the schismatic Lawrence churches/diocese left with
everything they wanted.  (Churches that did not depart kept their
buildings, records, trusts, etc. - no argument from Lawrence.)  The
parishes that did leave kept their buildings, their records, their history,
their money, their logos and marks, and their names.  The Lawrence diocese
kept their name (Diocese of South Carolina), their signs and marks of
identity - i.e. the diocesan shield, the diocesan records, the diocesan
trusts, the diocesan offices, and St. Christopher Camp and Conference
Center...I am sure there are more things.  (The Episcopal Church in SC is
forbidden from referring to ourselves as a 'diocese.')

The schismatic Lawrence church (diocese and parishes), called Episcopal
Diocese of SC, brought the suit against The Episcopal Church and The
Episcopal Church in SC.  All real and intellectual properties are included
in the suit.  TECSC has signed an amicus brief on the Ft. W. case before
the USSC.

I'm sure this is no clearer.

Ginga

On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 11:09 PM, Grace Cangialosi <gracecan at gmail.com>
wrote:

> I'm still confused. You said the conservatives 'left, wanting to take
> everything' and the Supreme Court of Texas gave it back to them.
> So, in other words, they got to take everything?
>
> Why is the Episcopal Church suing the Episcopal Diocese? Aren't they on
> the same side? I would think the Episcopal Church or Diocese would be suing
> the breakaway folks...
>
>
>
> > On Oct 20, 2014, at 6:00 PM, "Lynn Ronkainen" <ichthys89 at comcast.net>
> wrote:
> >
> > The conservatives 'left' wanting to 'take everything'.... the SCourt of
> TX gave it back to them... it's still not settled as you can see.  The TX
> SCourt still fancies that TX is a Republic, IMNSHO...
> >
> > 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: "Grace Cangialosi" <gracecan at gmail.com>
> > Sent: Monday, October 20, 2014 4:54 PM
> > To: <magdalen at herberthouse.org>
> > Subject: Re: [Magdalen] EC v. ED of Ft. Worth
> >
> >> So is this Episcopal Church vs. Episcopal Diocese? Which group are the
> good guys?
> >>
> >>> On Oct 20, 2014, at 5:26 PM, Roy Murphy <roy.murphy at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> The Episcopal church won in the state district court and the appeals
> court
> >>> but the TX Supreme Court ruled in favor of the former bishop of Ft.
> Worth.
> >>> TEC appealed to SCOTUS. The brief is not a bad argument. It has already
> >>> gotten a few amicus curae briefs in support.
> >>>
> >>> SCOTUS hasn't yet decided whether to grant cert on the case. The
> justices
> >>> will discuss it on 12/31 and decide whether to hear the case, deny the
> >>> request they hear it or hold it over for another conference.
> >>>> On Oct 20, 2014 12:26 PM, "Jay Weigel" <jay.weigel at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> Huh? Details, please.
> >>>>
> >>>>> 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.
>