A commenter writes:
I was at the meeting at St. John's in Lodia (see posting below). I am not a graybeard, and I am not a member of that congregation. I am a member of another parish in the diocese of San Joaquin. You ask if the counterparts at the meeting could sit through a whole session as the Rt Rev John David Scholfield did. Many of us have done so numerous times in the last few years, at Deanery meetings and at general convention. The service and meeting at St. Johns was refreshing and uplifting for so many of us in the diocese who have had no voice for a long time. And I am so weary of the disdain and disrespectful comments by the "conservatives" who think they have the only possible understanding of "truth."
The Bloviator responds:
Judging by the people I see in the picture below, almost all of them look at least as old as I. When I don't shave, my whiskers are as gray as a winter day in Germany so I think I am qualified to point out graybeards when I see them. Perhaps you younger folks were out of camera range.
You've "had no voice for a long time?" Welcome to the club, I've felt the same, for over thirty years. Not that that hasn't stopped those who claim to be on the side of inclusiveness from showering me and those who share my "conservative" (I'm not ashamed of that word) views with abuse and condescension.
Regarding my understanding of the "truth" (why do you use quotation marks there?): My understanding of it with respect to Church doctrine is that it is based on Scripture, the Creeds and the Thirty-Nine Articles. Modern day ECUSA seems to regard those three items as mere historical artifacts, to be adjusted, de-emphazied or just plain ignored as necessary should they happen to conflict with ever changing contemporary mores. I demur.
Like you, I am truly weary of the disdain and disrespect. I suspect I have been putting up with it a lot longer than you but relief is at hand for both of us. There will be a bust up, soon. The two sides today sadly resemble the bitter and acrimonious partners in a long but utterly failed marriage. Ruth Gledhill got it right in the London Times today: It's time for a divorce; the warring parties should go their separate ways for their mutual good health and sanity.
Maybe then there can be some healing. God be with you.