Comments on: CASEY: Grace Church property dispute “absurd”

By: Steve Brown

Steve Brown — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 13:55:06 +0000

Dayle has been a good and faithful priest to his parish. He has a clear sense of how the ethos of the Episcopal church is lived out, revealed by his comments in the interview. The narrow-minded bloggers here seem to want rigid, solid boundaries that start to look like the walls of a trench.

By: Bettyd

Bettyd — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 18:23:29 +0000

Casey is just another sell-out to the episcopal “business” that left God a LONG time ago.

By: Frank Van Zant

Frank Van Zant — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 01:54:26 +0000

The position that the property was held in trust by the diocese won in the court - that is true. However, Casey fails to face up to the fact that justice was not served in this case. The diocese never contributed a nickel to the formation or upkeep of the property. A majority of the parishioners voted for separation with the assumption that they would keep the Civily (and locally) registered title to the property. This is where the train left the tracks with the guidance and financial support to the diocese from the National church. Deep pockets there. A similar case in California will head for the U.S. Supreme Court and could be settled quite differently there.
Other than that, the heresies of the hierarchy of the Episcopal church over the last 40 or 50 years are almost taking on a legendary stature in the scriptural Christian communities.