Were I on a standing committee, I'd need a certain amount of convincing to vote to confirm a candidate who once voted to lead a diocese out of the church. On stewardship grounds alone, this risk would be hard to justify.

Hmmm. Why did Mark Lawrence immediately jump to mind?

Of the three, Canon Stevenson appears to be very qualified to do the job. His response to question 8, seems to be sincere. I think he will struggle with the challenge and stay the course. I don't think that about the other two candidates.

"8. A bishop is called to “guard the faith, unity and discipline in the Church” (BCP 517).
How do you understand this charge as it relates to the current crisis and other
challenges within the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion?

The issues we face today create strong feelings and often lead to deep hurt, regardless of the
side on which we find ourselves. Each party believes strongly in their cause, and often cannot
understand why or how the other could possibly hold the position that they do. This is nothing
new to our age, nor to the community of faith. Martha of Bethany disagreed with her sister
Mary. Peter and John had a great rivalry (we see that coming to a head in a foot race to the tomb
of Jesus on Easter day). Paul and Barnabas, once the best of friends, parted ways for a time. Yet
Jesus loved and ministered to them all. Any response to the troubles before us now, whether it
be individual or corporate, must bear this is mind.
Bishops are, of course, charged with guarding “the faith, unity and discipline in the Church,”
which means that they find themselves, more times than most would care to be, right in the
middle of disputes of great passion, having to serve as both counselor and mediator. Bishops do
not have the luxury of thin skin; they may not, in good faith, act as if it will all just go away if it is
ignored; nor may they substitute their own sense of right and wrong for the revelation of God.
I believe that there are several important principles that should guide a bishop as he or she
works through the controversies. First, we are created in the image of the Triune God, a God
who is by nature a perfect communion of persons. From this we learn that we, too, are intended
to be in communion with others. When we separate from each other we are diminished as a
community and as persons. In the Garden, Satan succeeded in his temptations only when Adam
and Eve were apart.
Further, we learn from Jesus the lessons of humility and forgiveness in our dealings with
others. The Son of God humbled himself to draw us into the Kingdom, and we must be
prepared to set aside our own places of entrenched power. John the Baptist understood that he
had to take a step back in order for Christ to be seen in front. Paul came to realize that he was
the foremost of sinners, but it was that nature which Jesus would use as an example of mercy.
Peter would deny Christ three times, but was given the chance by the risen Lord to proclaim his
love anew that same three times.
Lastly, we must remember that when we are focused on doing the work of mission and
ministry that cuts across all generations of the Church and to which we are called by Christ, all
things find their appropriate place in our common life. Bringing souls into conscious awareness
of the love of the living God through Christ will bring the victory that we all seek."

Martins, in particular, may have difficulty getting consent if he sticks with his conservative views on same-sex unions and gay clergy.

I wish someone (preferably local) would inform the State Journal-Register that it's Martins' ACTIONS (past, and potentially future), not his "views", that will be the significant hurdle (to episcopal consents), should he be elected.

JC Fisher

I have worked with Dan+ too and appreciate his voice even though I disagree with his positions on women in orders and the glbt blessings and ordinations.

While I know he does not like the decisions TEC has made he has none the less remained. He has not liked losing at GC on issues of importance, but he is also a Cubs fan and so used to losing only to gear up for "Next Season."

I am not saying Dan isn't a good guy, or that there isn't room for people of his views in the church, but I am troubled by that vote, by his statement that the church had "covered itself in shame" at GC 2009, and his recent writings about our church's governance on the HOBD list. (He doesn't like democracy as much as I think it is necessary to like it.)

Trust. Trust for one another? The God that I understand has made it clear to me (repeatedly through life experience) that I´m to ¨discern¨ right from wrong, truth from un-truth, self-accountability from irresponsible behavior at Church and beyond Church...I read what Bonnie read and I agree: ¨Canon Stevenson seems qualified and sincere¨...Lord have mercy at TEC diocese of Springfield as they need, and seek, a welcoming and loving peacemaker...the ongoing intrigue, behind-the-scene chronic politicing, and destructive drama must cease.

Best as I can tell from this post, Dan not only did not vote to separate from the Episcopal Church in 2008, but also actively worked to prevent that from happening.

I followed the blog thread further and found this post, in which Dan explains his reluctant Yea vote in 2006 -- and stresses that it is no guarantee of a Yea on second reading the next year.

Doug, I read those items at the time they were posted. I can appreciate that Dan found himself in a difficult position, but the fact is that when confronted with a resolution that paved the way for a resolution that put Bishop Schofield and his followers outside of the Episcopal Church, Dan voted yes. This disqualifies him in my mind from serving as a bishop of the church. Having had a chance to meet a number of people who were treated very badly for being forthright in their opposition to the measure that Dan supported, I can't muster a great deal of sympathy for his plight then or now.