There's a self-evident contradiction in the official United Methodist News Service report of the complaint filed against Bishop Talbert. [See below full text of UMNS #215]
UMNS #215 quotes Bishop Melvin Talbert contradicting Bishop Elias Galvan, as follows:
<<When contacted for comment early April 20, Talbert said he hadn't seen Vance's complaint. "Bishop Galvan informed me that this had reached his desk," he said. Galvan told United Methodist News Service that he had received two pieces of correspondence but hadn't examined them to see whether they were complaints.>>
Something is VERY ODD about this.
FURTHER...unless our bishop is prescient, how could he speak of "two" documents he "hadn't examined" (his terms) in connection with a complaint filing, unless he had indeed examined them to know their contents?
What do you say to this?
[Click] button If you would like to add your to the UCM News
<Back to News