Back when I posted that essay, I took a lot of flak. My site statistics went through the roof. Right-wing folks charged me with slander or libel for daring to state that Bishop John-David Schofield was a "celibate homosexual." The folks who stole the Episcopal Majority domain name called me "TEM's Loose Cannon." The very sick woman in Canada called it a lie, and said I should be "charged with libel and defamation." The gang at StandFirm had the funniest article: "Lisa Fox Hits Bottom, Digs." Fortunately, even Brad Drell and Greg Griffith (of StandFirm) confirmed my story that Bishop Schofield is a recovering (or celibate) homosexual. [Drell's confirmation is only available on the WayBack Machine because of his blog changeover; his link no longer works.]
Some of them kept hammering away. They challenged me to come up with "proof positive." Apparently, it wasn't enough that various people (ranging from Brad Drell to Elizabeth Kaeton) had heard Bishop John-David Schofield brag he was a "celibate homosexual" who had "exorcised" homosexuality from other men. They wanted a smoking gun.
At the time I wrote my essay, I had plenty of verbal and anecdotal evidence. Today I found one part of that "smoking gun" in print.
Digging through some archives, today I found another story that is helpful. It appeared in the 1994/95 issue of the Voice of Integrity newsletter. Before you open this link, remember that back in the early 1990s, the dissidents had created an organization they called the "Episcopal Synod of America" or ESA. [Now they call themselves by names like the "Anglican Communion Network" or the "American Anglican Council" or "CANA," but it's really the same people harping on the same tired old themes, especially the "TEC is apostate" theme.] Back then, the ESA issued a daily newsletter during General Convention, to keep the faithful informed.
Here is the article I found in the Fall 1994/Winter 1995 issue of The Voice of Integrity, gleaned from the ESA convention journal. Click on the image to see the full-size page.
Here's a cropped-down transcript of the article. Click on it to see it larger, or trust this transcript I've prepared:
Bishop Outs Himself in InterviewI return where I started. I am willing to recognize that Bishop Schofield is not a "practicing homosexual." But I remain perplexed by the self-loathing that has led him to take such a virulent stand against gay men and lesbians in our church.
One member of the Committee on Prayer Book and Liturgy who strongly opposed the study of blessings was Bishop John-David Schofield of San Joaquin. In an amazingly frank interview with Foundations Daily, the ESA journal at convention, Schofield said his opposition was based on his own experience at New Creation Ministries, an "ex-gay" program in Fresno. Although Bishop Schofield had previously told members of his clergy that he was a "cured homosexual," this is believed to be the first time he did so in print, albeit not as explicitly. He said he could not support "liturgies which purport to celebrate a lifestyle which I have seen as destructive." The article continues: "Bishop Schofield sees 'waverers' falling into the homosexual lifestyle because of the 'mixed message' which the Church is giving them." The article concludes with a Schofield statement that could have been made by Integrity: "The Church will be held responsible ultimately for the lives that have been destroyed, emotionally and spiritually as well as physically."
I recognize that I was born and raised to be a right proper racist. I recognize that I have not yet shed all the vestiges of my early-and-deeply-ingrained racism. The best I can do is to recognize it when I see it.
I wonder what demons Bishop Schofield is still fighting, as he deals with his "recovering homosexual" identity. To be sure, he hates homosexuals even more than he hates the women whom he will not ordain to the priesthood.
Now, at least, we have some facts about his "ex-gay" identity.
= = = = = = = = =
Addendum 12/19/07: BabyBlue [a.k.a. Mary Ailes] commented here that I had been sloppy in my references to the earlier schismatic movements in (and out of) the Episcopal Church. She was entirely correct. I have spent some a few days doing my research, and have now posted Alphabet Soup, in which I tried a bit harder to pull the threads together.