[AnAmericanMother]

First - "impaired" is less catastrophic than "broken", implying a merely damaged relationship. Many of the orthodox have continued to use this term, possibly with a hope of some sort of reconciliation. My personal take is that this is whistling past the graveyard. Unless the orthodox are willing to give up their beliefs, there will be no reconciliation.

Second - since ECUSA is a "top down" organization, there is no provision for removing a bish other than an ecclesiastical trial. And THAT has been a paper tiger ever since "bishop" Spong was NOT removed for what amounted to atheism.

If the orthodox made a strategic error, it was to allow the revisionist/heretics to get control of the administration of the church. But I'm not sure they could have done anything about it.

[ken5050]

Thanks muchly for the info...re "removing" a bishop..would there be any procedure or precedent for the majority of parishes to issue the equivalent of a religious "vote of no confidence" in the bishop? IOW, shame him into leaving?