Thanks to Greg to pointing me to this WaPo article stating that a judge ruled today that the August vote to remove the Rev. Charles Wallace Smith was invalid. The article also reports that the church canceled the vote scheduled for tomorrow regarding Smith's tenure and that the church will have a prayer service instead. I believe the church's position had been that the August vote wasn't valid because the church set tomorrow as the time/place for the official vote. That tomorrow's vote has been cancelled seems shady to me, although I don't know the ins and outs of the lawsuit or of today's ruling. If the official church party line was that the August vote was not official because the vote had been officially scheduled by the powers-that-be for tomorrow, isn't it shady that tomorrow's church-sanctioned vote has been cancelled?
I really don't care about Shiloh's in-fighting, and, given their portfolio of vacant properties which is surely indicative of ineffectiveness, I'm not surprised by it. Also, I am somewhat mis-trusting of the motives of the dissident group. I do wish that Shiloh were a better neighbor--particularly regarding their abhorrent property stewardship--and maybe all of this internal ugliness will bring about some positive changes in that regard.