Martins supported by Concerned Laity of Springfield

The Lead has published several letters concerning Bishop-elect Dan Martins. Below is a letter in support from the group Concerned Laity of the Springfield Diocese.

_________

An Open Letter to Standing Committee Members and Bishops with Jurisdiction
by The Concerned Laity of the Springfield Diocese ("CLSD")

The Concerned Laity of the Springfield Diocese was initially organized in 2003 (in association with the Via Media USA) to provide a voice for the disenfranchised moderate majority (primarily lay, but also including a few brave clergy) by calling for full participation of all points of view and all sorts of persons in the governance and ministry life of the diocese, and for Springfield's return to an active and cooperative role within the Episcopal Church.

CLSD congregations represent approximately two-thirds of ASA and Pledge and Plate income within the Diocese of Springfield and many CLSD members were actively involved in the election process that resulted in the election of Father Dan Martins.

CLSD wants all in the church, especially members of Standing Committees and Bishops with jurisdiction, to know that while Father Martins may not have been the first choice of all of our members, he was very near the top of everyone's list of preferred candidates, and we strongly urge you to provide Father Martins with the necessary consents. CLSD has been assured in writing by Bishop-elect Martins that he will not take the Diocese out of The Episcopal Church -- "I cannot imagine circumstances in which I would seek to lead the Diocese of Springfield out of the Episcopal Church. Period. Full stop. Take that to the bank. Should I ever come to believe that my own soul is fatally compromised by my association with the Episcopal Church, I would leave it simply as an individual ... I am clearer than ever that this is where I am called to be. What would cause me to individually leave would be a conviction that my own soul's health was in clear and present danger. I don't foresee that happening.)" Thus, Father Martin's stated commitment, and the very makeup of the Diocese of Springfield (see the election Process Survey results
http://www.episcopalspringfield.org/documents/SurveyResults.pdf) should assure the broader church that the Diocese of Springfield is not leaving the Episcopal Church ... the most favorable environment for that eventuality has passed without ever having the necessary votes to succeed.

CLSD believes our bishop-elect to be a person of integrity and honesty, with evident gifts for gracious listening, inclusive leadership and pastoral care - three of the most urgent needs within the Diocese. We believe he will be faithful to his vows to conform to the doctrine, discipline, and worship of the Episcopal Church. We encourage anyone with questions or concerns to
contact Fr Martins directly.

The hope and prayer of the CLSD is for a speedy affirmative conclusion of the consent process. We look forward to the consecration of our new bishop on March 19, 2011, with Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori as chief consecrator.

Charles T Evans - Convener / Moderator CLSD

Comments (3)

Be sure to read the linked "survey" that they took in the diocese. The sexuality section is quite interesting. A few of the most notable points:

The Bishop can be a woman
Yes-63.10%
Neutral or no definite stance-22.17%
No-14.74%

The Bishop will support civil unions and same-sex blessings
Yes-30.28%
Neutral-26.59%
No-43.13%

Bishop will support ordination of partnered gay and lesbian clergy
Yes-26.21%
Neutral-27.76%
No-51.02%

Bishop has never been divorced and remarried
Yes-21.7%
Neutral-48.48%
No-29.82%

Bishop must be heterosexual
Yes-49.68%
Neutral-27.19%
No-23.13%

This makes Springfield look a lot less conservative than one might initially think. 2/3 of persons think their bishop can be a woman. 1/2 of them would be neutral or OK with a non-heterosexual bishop. More than 1/2 are OK with or neutral towards same-sex blessings and civil unions. A bare majority of 51% is not OK with partnered gay and lesbian clergy. As would be expected, a non-biblical stance towards a divorced bishop seems to be perfectly OK. In short, at least 1/2 or more of the diocese would seem to be in disagreement with their future bishop on sexuality issues if this survey is valid.

This raises the question of who elected Dan Martins. If the convention that elected Dan is also in charge of voting on issues of remaining in the TEC, then might they not take the diocese in a direction that the majority does not support?

The comments by CLSD are, for me, compelling. I hope Fr. Martins receives the needed consents and goes on to a distinguished career in Springfield.

Some observers view the controversy over Martins as evidence of TEC's decline. It is, rather, a sign of the tussle and bustle that mark a healthy progressive church. All candidates should be discussed so openly and thoroughly.

Robert T. Dodd

Add your comments

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

Reminder: At Episcopal Café, we hope to establish an ethic of transparency by requiring all contributors and commentators to make submissions under their real names. For more details see our Feedback Policy.

Advertising Space