Talk:Katharine Jefferts Schori

The section on her election now contains information that doesn't fit chronologically. We have the election ... then we have dioceses questioning alternative primatial oversight (supposedly after the election; no date or source give [I do know that this did occur and don't dispute its factuality]); then suddenly we jump back before the election to 2003 with her consent to the election of +Robinson; then a news conference shortly after the election, and finally her installation. After this, we have a few trips, including the claim that she's "reenergized" the Episcopal Church in Puerto Rico.

I'd like to re-organize this section, trying to make it more chronological than it currently is, and separate some of the information into other sections. A section on her "Tenure as Bishop of Nevada" could include the information about her consent to the election of +Robinson in 2003, as well as some other information. Then another section "Tenure as Presiding Bishop and Primate" could have the information about the dioceses requesting Primatial oversight (I'd like to re-write this without the language which presupposes that the reason for the request was because they do not ordain women; the Diocese of Pittsburgh requested this, and it does ordain women; I have been reading a number of sources from the diocese requesting alternative primatial oversight, and the issue of womens' ordination hasn't arisen. Many, many other reasons were given; but I don't think these need to be stated either).

I also hope that we can come to something more of an agreement about the election materials. I've also found some information on the procedure of the Nominating Committee which was tasked for this election, at http://www.episcopalchurch.org/75383_73733_ENG_HTM.htm, which I think is relevant. I'm not sure when I'll get to this. I'd like to put it on a separate page first, before publication.

Is this amenable?

Jmc41 (talk) 19:10, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

:Please go ahead. It sounds like your edits will improve the article, but if not, someone will revert them and we can discuss it then. Jonathunder (talk) 03:34, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

In terms of ecumenical relations, do you think it's worth mentioning anywhere that she denied her mother, an Orthodox Christian, an Orthodox funeral and against her wishes gave her an Episcopalian one? — Preceding unsigned comment added by OrthodoxLinguist (talk • contribs) 00:43, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

: If there are reliable sources that attest both that the event occurred and that it had ecumenical significance, sure. Mrhsj (talk) 18:23, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

::As far as I can tell, there's not going to be a reliable source. Her mother's [http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=19980407&slug=2743852 obituary] (which is written in a rather fluffy style) says only that services were held in Corvallis. There are anecdotal accounts in the blog of one of her enemies that perhaps explain things a bit more; however, even if they are to believed, the phrasing of "denied her mother an Orthodox funeral" is not warranted by that evidence. It's a trope that is passed all over the conservative Anglican blogosphere, but at best it appears to be questionable interpretation of hearsay. Mangoe (talk) 18:41, 22 February 2012 (UTC)

The last paragraph in this section contains editorializing. Words and phrases such as "highly controversial", "unprecedented", "misjudgements" are not objective. I wish to remove this paragraph.

Matisse412 (talk) 19:31, 15 November 2012 (UTC)matisse412

:Some of the language is problematic. The controversies are well-documented. Mangoe (talk) 19:50, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

The language needs to be fixed.

Matisse412 (talk) 20:48, 15 November 2012 (UTC)matisse412

:File:Information.svg Thank you for your suggestion{{#if:| regarding :{{{1}}}}}. When you believe an article needs improvement, please feel free to make those changes. Wikipedia is a wiki, so anyone can edit almost any article by simply following the {{lcfirst:{{int:edit}}}} link at the top.
The Wikipedia community encourages you to be bold in updating pages. Don't worry too much about making honest mistakes—they're likely to be found and corrected quickly. If you're not sure how editing works, check out how to edit a page, or use the sandbox to try out your editing skills. New contributors are always welcome. You don't even need to log in (although there are many reasons why you might want to). Jonathunder (talk) 21:16, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

::Nothing much seems to have happened to the Tenure as Presiding Bishop section in two years which [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Katharine_Jefferts_Schori&oldid=628420832 still] seems very POV. Excerpt: Jefferts Schori's tenure has been highly controversial and marked by nearly unprecedented schism... has initiated lawsuits... a supporter of same-sex relationships... a supporter of abortion rights... supported the HHS mandate on birth control... Some within the church have questioned the orthodoxy of her theology... her statement..was widely criticized.... It's not that any of the statements are wrong, necessarily (I wouldn't know one way or the other, as I'm not versed in this topic, and nothing is sourced) but the way they are listed and the adjectives used just seem to point out a lot of things that seem negative or critical.

::Not one thing is mentioned that seems positive, or neutral. Does this really reflect her entire tenure in the eight years since she was elected? If she was really that awful, wouldn't she have been removed? Mathglot (talk) 02:50, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

:::A decade later, I've finally done some WP:NPOV cleanup :) still could use some work but I think it's dramatically better. Ductwork (talk) 00:38, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Atheists have higher iq than average.

Episcopals have higher iq than atheists.

This occures because Episcopals accept evolution and modern science, but unlike atheists

have warmer more positive families and bonds of support and love.

Atheists have the anxiety to fight for atheism and basic rights, also many atheist communions

waist time fighting with other or explaining why they are atheists when Christians perceive as natural their belief.

Jehova martyrs and other extremes do not allow their members think scientifically and open mindingly.

Episcopals tend to accept both science and a positive warm not hard core communion.

Some atheists tried to mimic Episcopal values of warmth, natural belief without extreme struggles

to explain their existence to other, also without to focus on blaming other religions

either explaining atheism, but simply science.

Atheism has a negative meaning, it means in Greek non-theism.

Negative meanings cause anxiety and anxious behavior, and that lowers the iq.

Some non-theist groups use names about science also are open communities, but failed yet

to mimic the non anxious positive society of support. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.84.206.119 (talk) 13:54, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Katharine Jefferts Schori. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110702191422/http://www.episcopalchurch.org/78694_ENG_HTM.htm to http://www.episcopalchurch.org/78694_ENG_HTM.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20060617140347/http://www.livingchurch.org/publishertlc/viewarticle.asp?ID=2010 to http://www.livingchurch.org/publishertlc/viewarticle.asp?ID=2010

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

{{sourcecheck|checked=false|needhelp=}}

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:27, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

What is one supposed to make of "Of Irish and Swiss (Schori) ancestry", when a few lines later we learn Schori is her husband's name? Sparafucil (talk) 21:10, 20 May 2020 (UTC)

Current text is: Some within the church questioned the orthodoxy of her theology. For example, her statement that "the great Western heresy – is that we can be saved as individuals, that any of us alone can be in right relationship with God" in her opening address to the 2009 General Convention was criticized and prompted a clarifying statement from her in the following week.

However, what actually happened was: Jefferts Schori spoke about the crisis facing The Episcopal Church as its members remain divided over the authority of Scripture and homosexuality and as its relationship with some Anglican provinces overseas is impaired.

She said the "overarching connection in all of these crises has to do with the great Western heresy – that we can be saved as individuals, that any of us alone can be in right relationship with God." "It's caricatured in some quarters by insisting that salvation depends on reciting a specific verbal formula about Jesus," she told Episcopal delegates. "That individualist focus is a form of idolatry, for it puts me and my words in the place that only God can occupy, at the center of existence, as the ground of being. That heresy is one reason for the theme of this Convention."

Problem: Taking a single sentence out of context bends WP:NPOV, since the full statement clarifies the position, and has a different meaning. Since the event did generate some controversy, the event could stay, but giving a biased clip does not inform the reader.

I am going to change the text to: After her opening address to the 2009 General Convention, some within the church questioned her remarks regarding salvation, prompting a clarifying statement from her in the following week. [same citations]

 • Bobsd •  (talk) 19:35, 14 November 2024 (UTC)