In reporting on a boycott that he helped organize, Chris Sugden of Anglican Mainstrain makes a claim that I hope he can substantiate. It is dropped in a clause in the following sentence, and underlined, just so you don't miss it:
The clear implication of Bishop Fearon’s case ( which is also Archbishop Rowan Williams’ case) is that even though Anglicans have been persecuted and driven from their homes, buildings and jobs in the USA and Canada, other Anglican leaders should meet yet again with those responsible for these outrages and thus legitimate the presence of those who completely contradict the teaching and practice of the Christian churches.
Now if he means that priests and vestries who publicly stated that they were no longer affiliated with the Episcopal Church were made to relinquish leadership of Episcopal congregations and control of Episcopal Church property, he's right. But what's outrageous about that? Who get to keep the keys to an office they don't work in anymore, especially if they have gone to work for a competitor?
If there are priests or congregations of conservative theological views who have not publicly split from the Episcopal Church, who been driven from their jobs, property etc., I'd like to know about them so I can raise my voice on their behalf. If there aren't such priests and congregations, I am sure that Canon Sugden will offer a correction.