Why call for an election now?

I began my ministry at St. Benedict’s Parish in Plantation, Florida, in 1977. I would have been happy serving with the communicants there for the rest of my life. But after thirteen years I realized that, by God’s grace, I had done with them what I knew how to do. They needed someone to take them to the next level of discipleship. At the Cathedral of St. Paul the Apostle, in Fond du Lac, Wisconsin””although I left there upon having received your call””I knew that I had done with them what I knew how to do. They needed someone to take them to the next level of discipleship.

That is the present reality in our diocese. I am concluding, together with you, what I know how to do. When, following our diocesan convention last October, I met with the newly formed Diocesan Executive Council, and recognized their enthusiasm, their commitment, the efficiency of our present Commission structure, and progress we have all made by God’s grace and your ministry””I recognized that it was time for us to take the next step. Upper South Carolina needs a bishop who can cooperate with you, and provide appropriate episcopal leadership, in moving into the next level of Christian discipleship.
It is also true that my ministry as a member and then President of the Title IV Review Committee of The Episcopal Church absorbed some physical, emotional and spiritual energy, and dulled somewhat the edge of my creativity. It has not, however, reduced my love of the Lord and the Lord’s Church, nor the sheer joy I have as a deacon, priest and bishop.

The election process will take approximately 10 to 18 months, depending upon a number of factors. Our Diocesan Council, in its role as the Standing Committee and guided by the canons of the Church, will have the responsibility of establishing a Calling Committee and providing the guidelines for the calling process.

Read it all.

The Rt. Rev. J. Jon Bruno, whose diocese encompasses Los Angeles County and five other Southern California counties, made the announcement Friday during a diocesan convention in Riverside.

Bruno acted just days after hundreds of conservative Episcopal congregations in North America formed a breakaway church amid a rift that began with the ordination of a gay bishop in New Hampshire five years ago.

Bruno’s declaration is not expected to have a major effect on Episcopal churches in Southern California. Many have been blessing gay unions for years. But he has now made it official.

“The practice has not changed. The policy has. . . . It’s sort of like ‘coming out,’ ” said the Rev. Susan Russell, a lesbian priest at All Saints Episcopal Church in Pasadena. Russell also is president of Integrity USA, a group representing the gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgender community in the Episcopal Church.

Read it all.

The most vocal statement against the resolution came from the Rev. Roberts Smith, rector of St. Michael’s Episcopal Church in Riverside.

The resolution states that the moratorium violates church canons, which prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.

Smith said he agreed with the canons, but he said the moratorium correctly barred from the office of bishop people in same-sex relationships.

“What the Scriptures consistently condemn is homosexual sex, the practice of homosexual sex,” Smith said. “If you read the Scriptures, you’ll see it there again and again. It’s not a matter of orientation. It’s a matter of practice.”

St. Michael’s illustrates how the debate over homosexuality has caused deep fissures in the denomination.

Read it all.

Read it carefully and read it all.

The leader of the Episcopal Church arrives Friday in Riverside amid a debate on homosexuality that continues to tear the denomination apart.

The Most Rev. Katharine Jefferts Schori, presiding bishop of the 2.4 million-member denomination, will attend the annual meeting of the Diocese of Los Angeles on Friday and Saturday at the Riverside Convention Center. On the convention agenda is a resolution on whether priests in same-sex relationships should be consecrated bishops.

The Los Angeles Diocese includes San Bernardino County and west-central Riverside County.

Read the whole article.

Check them out.

I went to our diocesan archives to look for materials from a most difficult era in our nation’s financial history, the Great Depression. Very interesting what I found there. The program fund of the diocese was at $68,000 in 1929. It decreased almost two-thirds by 1935, when the fund receipts were in the amount of $27,000. It increased incrementally to about $31,000 in 1938 and remained at that level until the end of the war years.
The two Bishops of that era, Frederick Johnson and William Scarlett, both noted the sharp decrease in programming, as a result of falling revenues. Well, that’s what will happen, in the wake of steeply falling revenues. The Diocesan Journals got progressively thinner over the course of these years, because there were fewer things to report.
But these Bishops noted the drastic shortfall almost in passing, and with no sense of self-pity. They reported at length, however, about responsibilities of the Church to respond to a whole nation in crisis. And more particularly, to their Missouri neighborhoods in crisis.
The internal financial fact of funding shortfalls was noted, and the cuts were deep and painful. Whole programs vanished.
As far as I can tell from the Journals, the work of the Church in that era focused almost entirely beyond itself, which was a matter of mission and not program. And it happened by way of personal and corporate sacrifice.

Read it all.

Whatever our personal views on this election might be, the outcome is the same for all of us. All of us, no matter what our political perspective or our hopes for our nation and our world, are in this together.

Part of the deep tradition of the Episcopal Church is to pray for our leaders: rarely if ever have these prayers been more needed. Our nation and our world face vast and staggeringly complex problems; none of which can be solved quickly and easily. The problems are economic but they are aspirational as well. Bluntly put: how do we pay for things, and why do we make the particular choices that we do. As we answer that question we raise the deepest question of all: to what end do we live and move and have our being?

These will be testing times; times that, unless we are careful, will tempt us to pit one part of the population against another. Increasingly it will become clear to all that the journey will be long and it will be difficult. Speaking in economic terms, there will be a price to be paid: no one will be exempt. That being said, it is of fundamental importance that we, as a people, not give in to the temptation to balance budgets at the expense of those who simply lack the power to make their needs heard: the poor and those who serve the poor. However, sad to say, if history is any indicator, this is exactly what will happen.

I find it more than a little ironic that when the issue of meeting basic human needs is raised: be that education, or healthcare, or housing for the homeless, a common objection is the firm and wise sounding declaration: you know, you can’t just throw money at a problem. And yet, when financial institutions are in crisis, led by the very well paid people, who did so much to bring us this crisis in the first place, when they ask for aid that is exactly what happens. Money has been thrown at the problem. And it has been thrown without a really clear understanding of exactly what it will actually accomplish. As you know so well, we’re not talking here about billions of dollars, or tens of billions, not even hundreds of billions, but, in the end, something in excess of a trillion dollars. In human terms this is more money than the human mind can fathom.

Mind you, I am not saying that this shouldn’t be done, or that it won’t work. What I am saying is that we should keep all these things in perspective and be mindful of just who finally is asked to actually pay the price for the national excess that has brought us to this sad moment.

Read it all.

The annual convention of the Diocese of New York approved a resolution petitioning General Convention to grant continued use of either the lectionary found in the 1979 Book of Common Prayer or the Revised Common Lectionary indefinitely. Convention met Nov. 15-16 at a hotel and convention center in Mahwah, N.J.

Convention approved several other resolutions, including one calling on “the governor and the legislature of the State of New York to ensure civil marriage equality in this state by enacting the necessary legislation to permit same-sex couples to marry.”

None of the approved resolutions produced extended debate, but approval of the $13.3 million budget as presented was approved only after the Rt. Rev. Mark Sisk, Bishop of New York, spoke in favor of it. The budget, which represented an increase of more than $880,000 over the previous year, was prepared last summer, before the severe financial downturn affected Wall Street. Some convention delegates were prepared to go through the budget line-by-line on the convention floor, but Bishop Sisk urged against a floor fight. Instead, he promised that the trustees would carefully monitor expenses in light of the new financial situation facing most parishes. Bishop Sisk also promised that the diocese would not take excessively punitive measures against congregations which are unable to meet their assessment due to financial hardship.

Read it all.

Under a discernment plan approved by convention delegates Nov. 7-8, a task force in the Diocese of Eau Claire will consider five options for the diocese’s future. These range from electing a full-time diocesan bishop to replace the Rt. Rev. Keith Whitmore, to dissolving the diocese.

Other options include the election of a part-time or bi-vocational bishop, hiring a provisional bishop, or junctioning with another diocese””most probably Fond du Lac””to form a new diocese.

Read it all.

Delegates to the 26th annual diocesan convention of the Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth voted Saturday to realign the diocese with the Anglican Province of the Southern Cone.

With little debate or emotion, delegates voted by order, 73 votes in favor, 20 against, among clergy and 98-28 among the laity for realignment. After the vote Bishop Jack Iker read a letter from Archbishop Gregory Venables, welcoming Fort Worth into the Southern Cone.

In a statement, Episcopal Church Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori said after the vote that the church “grieves the departures of a number of persons from the Diocese of Fort Worth. We remind those former Episcopalians that the door is open if they wish to return.

“We will work with Episcopalians in the Diocese of Fort Worth to elect new leadership and continue the work of the gospel in that part of Texas. The gospel work to which Jesus calls us demands the best efforts of faithful people from many theological and social perspectives, and The Episcopal Church will continue to welcome that diversity.”

Read it all.

I realize that for some of you this means that at the conclusion of this Convention, you will no longer recognize me as your Bishop and that the House of Bishops of TEC will initiate plans to depose me as a Bishop of TEC. However, it is important to understand what such an action can do and what it cannot do. I cannot be un-ordained any more than I can be un-baptized. Holy Orders, like Holy Baptism, bestows an indelible character and imparts a grace that is irrevocable. A deacon, priest or bishop who is deposed may be deprived of exercising his ordained ministry in congregations of The Episcopal Church, but he is not thereby un-ordained or removed from Holy Orders. The clergy of this Diocese were ordained not just for The Episcopal Church, but for the one holy catholic and apostolic church. We are deacons, priests and bishops of the Church of God, not an American denomination. As the Preface to the Ordination Rites says on page 510 of the Prayer Book, “The threefold ministry is not the exclusive property of this portion of Christ’s catholic Church.” I can assure you that all the clergy of this Diocese, under the authority and protection of the Province of the Southern Cone, will continue to exercise our ordained ministry as deacons, priests and bishops in good standing in the worldwide Anglican Communion. Our Province will change, but the validity of our sacred orders will remain unchanged.

I am certain that in the months ahead, leaders of TEC will move to depose not only me, but every deacon and priest here present who votes for realignment at this Convention. Sad to say, some of you here in this Convention hall will cooperate with and facilitate those plans. It is my belief that such a course of action is not only unreasonable and uncharitable, but violates our ecclesiological understanding of what the Anglican Communion claims to be. If we are a worldwide Communion of Provinces who share a common faith, practice and ministry, then it does not make sense to depose clergy who move from one Province to another. No one is abandoning the Communion of the Church by realigning with another Province. The far better way to proceed would be for TEC to accept the fact that a realignment has occurred, to recognize the transfer of this Diocese to another Province of the Anglican Communion, and to wish us well in the name of the Lord. There is something deeply disturbing about a Church that would prefer to litigate and depose rather than to negotiate a peaceful, amicable separation among brothers and sisters in Christ who can no longer walk together.

I call upon the Presiding Bishop of The Episcopal Church and her colleagues to halt the litigation, to stop the depositions, and to cease the intimidation of traditional believers. Instead, let us pursue a mediated settlement, a negotiated agreement that provides for a fair and equitable solution for all parties, and let us resist taking punitive actions against our opponents. Christians are called to work out our differences with one another, not sue one another in secular courts.

Read it all.

The Reverend Robert Stocksdale of St. Andrew’s Church in Meriden, voted in favor of the [diocesan] resolution.

“I would like for us to have the ability to chose,” he said. “I don’t think Jesus would turn away anyone.”

Turn people away from doing what, exactly? Or does Jesus not care what people do. There is that rich young ruler gentleman, for example, whom Jesus let walk away. And for a reason too. Read it all.

By a margin of just 16 votes, delegates to the Diocese of Pennsylvania’s annual convention decided Nov. 8 to sell all the property of Camp Wapiti. The camp has been the subject of debate at previous conventions.

Camp opponents have argued that the Rt. Rev. Charles E. Bennison Jr., the diocese’s recently deposed bishop, misled diocesan leadership about the true cost of diocesan funds to support the camp. After the diocese’s standing committee filed a complaint regarding diocesan funds and Camp Wapiti, the Title IV Review Committee advised against prosecuting Bishop Bennison. By then Bishop Bennison already was in church court on other charges that ultimately led to his being deposed by the House of Bishops.

The convention received two resolutions regarding the camp. One was to sell the camp whole, and the other was to keep the property and develop it more fully. Under the special-order rules, the convention chose to debate and vote on the first resolution, and to debate the second only if first failed. The rules said that approval of either resolution rendered the other resolution moot.

Read it all.

The following is the originally proposed Resolution of Policy on Same-Gender Blessings:

RESOLVED, That the Diocese of Oregon supports the full and equal participation of gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgendered persons in all rites and rituals of the Episcopal Church and the blessing of same-gender unions by the clergy who wish to provide such blessings. Clergy deciding as a matter of conviction not to perform same-gender blessings are asked to refer couples seeking such blessings to clergy who choose to provide this pastoral ministry.

Explanation

By adopting this resolution the Diocese:

”¢ Takes action consistent with The Episcopal Church’s position “that homosexual persons are children of God who have a full and equal claim with other persons upon the love, acceptance and pastoral concern and care of the Church.” (General Convention 1976-A069)

”¢ Encourages full and equal pastoral response to all couples (whether of the same or opposite genders) as a matter of conscience and integrity, including appropriate preparation and education about the responsibilities of entering into a life-long, intentional, Christian relationship, mindful of the teaching that “such relationships be characterized by fidelity, monogamy, mutual affection and respect, careful, honest communication and the holy love which enables those in such relations to see in each other the image of God.” (General Convention 2000-D039).

”¢ Affirms the Christian community’s participation in supporting couples as they live out their holy commitments to each other.

Implications/Financial Impact

Adopting this resolution has no impact on expenditures by the Diocese.

””Respectfully submitted by the dean and vestry of Trinity Episcopal Cathedral to the Convention of the Episcopal Diocese of Oregon.

Resolutions Committee Statement

The committee decision was to adhere to General Convention moratorium on public rite of blessing of same-gender unions. To be incongruent with that position will cause divisiveness at a time when unity and cohesiveness is most desirable in the Diocese. The Committee therefore recommends a “do not pass.”

(Please note that the resolutions committee recommended against the motion in its originally proposed form; this and one other proposed resolution and a canon change submission may be found here–KSH).

According to an email received the following is the resolution that actually passed:

Resolution of Policy on Same-Gender Blessings
November 2008

RESOLVE[D], that the Diocese of Oregon meeting in November 2008 in its 120th Convention recognizes in accordance with General Convention Resolution C051 (2003), that local faith communities are operating within the bounds of our common life when they explore and experience liturgies celebrating and blessing same-gender unions, and

RESOLVE[D], that the Diocese direct the Convocations under the guidance of the Standing Committee to provide opportunities for full dialogue regarding access to, and equal participation of all God’s people who are members of our Church, including those who are gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered, in all the rites and sacraments of the Episcopal Church, to include access to blessings of relationships and unions that are based on mutual love and respect, fidelity, monogamy, and a mutual life-long commitment, and

RESOLVE[D], that the Convocation Presidents and Deans work together cooperatively to assure that these issues are discussed fully at specially called or regularly scheduled Convocation meetings that take place beginning with the conclusion of Convention 2008 and before the commencement of Convention 2009, and

RESOLVE[D], that the Presidents and Deans of the Convocations of the Diocese will work together to develop a report on the results of the Convocation dialogues, and based on this report will develop recommendations to Standing Committee and Convention on how the Diocese of Oregon might proceed to support the clergy as they strive to respond pastorally to the needs of gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered people, as children of God.

Here is one:

R08-4
Development of Liturgical Rites for Same-Gender Unions

Resolved: This 102nd Annual Council of the Diocese of Atlanta approves the following resolution to the 76th General Convention of The Episcopal Church, meeting in Anaheim, California, in 2009; and be it further

Resolved: This council directs the Secretary of Council to transmit the following resolution to the Secretary of the General Convention:

Resolved: The House of __________ concurring, the 76th General Convention of The Episcopal Church authorizes the Standing Commission on Liturgy and Music to develop appropriate rites for the celebration and blessing of the sacred unions of gay and lesbian persons, taking into account the variety of civil arrangements for such unions available in the regions served by the church; and be it further

Resolved: that such rite or rites shall be presented at the 77th General Convention of the Episcopal Church.
EXPLANATION

In light of events following the Lambeth Conference of 2008, it is clear that our charitable restraint and response to the Windsor Report in the matter of our declining to develop a rite or rites to allow the celebration and blessing of sacred unions for people of the same gender has not had the effect of preserving unity and civility between those who believe such unions may be good and moral and those who cannot conceive as such a possibility being within the bounds of Christian faith and the Anglican Tradition. It is also clear that while a great many Episcopalians remain undecided about their own beliefs in these matters, they recognize both the desirability of allowing those who seek to make such commitments in the midst of their community of faith to do so; and that the reality that the cost of our charity has been at the expense of one clear minority within our church; and further that there is no compelling reason that these brothers and sisters should have to continue to bear the burden of that charity.

The development of such a rite or rites by and for the whole church will allow a restoration of decency and order from diocese to diocese under the guidance of each bishop, the ensuring of theological integrity to such rites and the capacity of the church to “sanction” and declare such committed relationships among people of the same gender to be both moral and fully within the bounds of our common life.

Submitted by: The Rev. Geoffrey M. St.J. Hoare, The Rev. Charles M. Girardeau,
The Rev. Noelle York-Simmons, The Rev. Elizabeth Shows Caffey
All Saints’, Atlanta

Please do read them all.

Live Broadcasting by Ustream

Read them carefully and read them all.

Note that the resolution that committed funds to a thorough study of the diocese is not listed there and it reads as follows:

Resolved, that the 174th Convention of the Diocese of Michigan grants permission to Diocesan Council to utilize the Extended Ministries Fund (EMF) corpus “not to exceed $325,000 for phase one of the proposed program” as outlined in the EMF report accepted at the August 23, 2008, Diocesan Council Meeting.

.

My thanks to Herb Gunn for this–KSH.

Here is one:

RESOLVED, that the Diocese of Maine calls for the repeal of B033, passed at the 75th General Convention and be it further

RESOLVED that the Diocese of Maine calls upon the 76th General Convention to refrain from restricting the field of potential candidates for future episcopates on the basis of gender or sexual orientation and to reject interference from outside the Convention that would attempt to affect its parliamentary process or negate the polity of The Episcopal Church, and be it further

RESOLVED that the Diocese of Maine maintain its commitment to participation in the Anglican Communion and to the listening process described in the Windsor Report. And be it further Resolved to direct its deputation to the 76th General Convention to submit a resolution to this effect. (“RESOLVED that the 76th General Convention will refrain from restricting the field of potential candidates for future episcopates on the basis of gender or sexual orientation and will reject interference from outside the Convention that would attempt to affect its parliamentary process or negate the polity of The Episcopal Church.”)

Explanation

Our Lord is not one to show partiality (Acts 10:34-35) and calls us to go and make disciples of all nations (Matt 28:19);

Our baptismal covenant calls us to respect the dignity of every human being;

Undue discrimination limits the ability of the faithful to elect qualified persons to leadership, including the position of bishop;

Title III, Canon 1, Section 2 of the Canons of The Episcopal Church clearly states that No person shall be denied access to the discernment process for any ministry, lay or ordained, in this church because of race, color, ethnic origin, national origin, sex, marital status, sexual orientation, disabilities or age;

Resolution B033, if interpreted to mean that a person living in a same-sex partnership should be excluded from consecration, stands in conflict with Title III, Canon 1, Section 2 of the Canons of the Episcopal Church;

As a result of the Windsor Report, bishops and deputies at the 75th General Convention were under a great deal of pressure to enact measures relating to the consecration of gay or lesbian bishops living in same-sex relationships. On June 20, 2006 the House of Deputies rejected Resolution A161, which would have prohibited the consecration of such individuals. However, using parliamentary procedure, the former Presiding Bishop and the Presiding Bishop-Elect brought forth Resolution BO33, which instructed “Standing committees and bishops with jurisdiction to exercise restraint by not consenting to the consecration of any candidate to the episcopate whose manner of life presents a challenge to the wider church and will lead to further strains on the communion.” While we believe this was done with the best intentions in an effort to prevent disharmony in the Communion, it was widely understood that “candidate”¦ manner of life” was a coded euphemism for gay and lesbian persons, and this interpretation was later validated by the House of Bishops. However, as was promptly pointed out following its passage, BO33 is in violation of the ecclesiastical laws of the Episcopal Church. In particular, Title III, Canon 1, Section 2 of the Canons of the General Convention prohibits discrimination based upon sexual orientation. While BO33 has had the intended chilling effect on the consecration of otherwise qualified gay and lesbian priests to the episcopate, with many such candidates declining nomination for fear of withheld consent, it has done little to mollify the increasingly strident voices throughout the Anglican Communion. As such, it has proven both unjust and ineffective in its aims.

Being that it is in violation of canon law, inconsistent with the scriptural message of God’s immeasurable and unconstrainable love for humanity, and an impediment to the work of the Spirit in the Church, we call for the revocation of BO33.

Read them all.

One final story goes to the heart of the connectedness of the body. At various times I found myself in formal and informal discussions where concerns were voiced about differences in the interpretation of scripture as it relates to the full inclusion of gays and lesbians in the life of the Church. I was astonished to hear stories of brutality and murder against Anglican Christians in some parts of the world where Christians and Muslims coexist in an uneasy peace. We were told that clergy and their families as well as lay members of congregations are regularly targeted to be beaten and/or killed after a news report reached their area from the “west” about gay marriage or other actions which appear to the perpetrators as direct acts against God.

I can tell you that none of the bishops I spoke with asked us to undo what has been done. None of the bishops I spoke to were willing to tear apart the Communion over their disagreement with us. However, I must share with you that they did ask us to slow down, and in the midst of our pursuit for justice remember to seek justice for those whose lives are lost in response to some of the actions we have taken; actions we call righteous. How our relationships with others in the Anglican Communion are defined as we step off into the future are as yet unclear. I know only that we must put our whole faith and trust in God.

Read it all.

A reader sent us a copy of the resolutions passed by the Diocese of Dallas during its convention October 17-18.
You can read them all here: Diocese of Dallas 2008 resolutions

The three resolutions forwarded to us:

1) Express gratitude express to Bishop Stanton and Bishop Lambert for voting No to the deposition of the Rt. Rev’d Robert Duncan

2) Request that the office of the Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church provide each diocese of The Episcopal Church with the following information:
a. the dollar amount spent by TEC on litigation against dioceses, parishes, groups of churches and individuals since General Convention 2006;
b. a list of the church accounts and/or budget items from which these funds were taken;
c. the proposed amount of money for litigation to be presented to the 2009 General Convention of the Episcopal Church.

3) Requests that the Episcopal Church adopt a policy of negotiation and/or mediation with regard to disputes over property, and according to the request of the Dar Es Salaam Primate’s Communiqué, cease and desist from engaging in lawsuits with fellow Christians.

According to our informant all three passed. We’d welcome more details as to vote margins, etc. Thanks!

In its proposal, the task force notes that “the Episcopal Diocese of Michigan is in steep decline.” Charts included in the document reveal that average Sunday attendance has declined by 22% since 2000. During the same time period “pledge and plate revenues” for all congregations combined has decreased by approximately $2 million, when adjusted for inflation.

The proposal also notes that since 1995, the annual diocesan budget has been dependent on a draw from the “appreciated value and investment income” of the EMF. In 2007 that draw amounted to 36% of the revenue in the budget. Tithes and offerings from congregations amounted to only 57% of the budget that same year.

The task force reported that the diocesan budget has been “cut substantially” over the past several years, including a reduction in staff. It said it concurs with its predecessor body (the EMF Task Force I) that “further budget cuts would cripple diocesan operations irrevocably.”

Read it all and follow the links as well.

So what did happen at convention? Actually quite a bit happened, and some of it was pretty positive. First, our bishop, though obviously quite contemplative during the convention Eucharist and the opening business session (and clearly focused upon what he was going to include in his convention address) quite boldly stood squarely on the side of “doing the right thing” and standing firm in upholding the constitution and canons of TEC against the blatant abuses of power by the Presiding Bishop of TEC, her chancellor and the House of Bishops. Knowing full well that the PB’s eyes and ears were present in our convention hall, your bishop stood tall and not only outlined the abuses of power that have occurred in three recent depositions of orthodox bishops, but declared that these types of abuses must be opposed and stopped. In the Alice in Wonderland world that is TEC at this time, this action is no small thing.

Four resolutions were proposed for consideration, three of which were approved by large margins. Two of the resolutions addressed the Communion Partners Plan which +MacPherson favors as a structure for the support of orthodox Episcopalians during the completion of the Windsor Process and pending a vote on the anticipated Anglican Covenant. Both passed overwhelmingly. The other two addressed the deposition of Bishop Robert Duncan of the Diocese of Pittsburgh. One of the resolutions dealt directly with the Duncan deposition and the abuse of constitutional and canonical process in securing the deposition. I had the pleasure of speaking in favor of that resolution and it passed. The second Duncan resolution did not pass and it appears to me that it did not pass principally because it sought to cite a statement by the Primates Council of GAFCON that condemned the Duncan deposition but that also called for the establishment of a separate province in North America for orthodox Anglicans (I also voted for that resolution). At this point in the life of our diocese, the overwhelming view of both the clergy and the lay orders is that we are not willing to speculate about a new province and, for now at least, our diocese prefers to work within the existing Anglican structures and particularly toward our consideration of an Anglican covenant.

Read it all.

Tim Fountain has the goods–there are multiple entries to read.

Sermon ”“ Diocese of Pittsburgh Convention October 4, 2008

This year is different. For as long as I can remember diocesan convention has been held the first week in November: As it comes it always reminds me to remember my wedding anniversary, also in the first week of November. November 3rd to be exact or is it November 2nd ? And every year Gale asks me where are we going to dinner for our anniversary? And I say, “To a hotel ballroom for a scrumptious meal! And you can even have your choice of beef tips over noodles, stuffed chicken breast or vegetable lasagna!
I have attended every diocesan and special convention of the Diocese of Pittsburgh since 1982, save one, that is, in 1985 when Gale and I and our family resided in Fairfax VA. This is my 26th diocesan convention either as a lay member or as a presbyter of the Diocese of Pittsburgh. If anyone is a son of this diocese, it is me. I came to Christ here as an Episcopalian, I was raised up for ministry here as an Episcopalian and I have ministered as a layman in three parishes and also as an ordained pastor in three parishes, and I interviewed to be rector in two others in the diocese though not called (now there’s two parishes that knew what they were doing!), I have preached in at least 20 different parishes in our diocese and have visited over sixty. I have served on more committees, task forces, Cursillo teams and diocesan search committees than I can remember, I been on Diocesan Council and served on the Standing Committee —now as the President. In short, I spent my whole Christian life here in this diocese as an Episcopalian. There is no other diocese that has claimed me and no other diocese I have ever desired to be part of. I am thoroughly a Pittsburgh Anglican — I bleed Stiller Black and Gold.
For the previous twenty-five conventions I sat out there and faced this way during Convention sermons and addresses. Now in this my twenty-sixth instead of standing with you I now stand before you and so I ask your prayers that I might be adequate to the task that I have called to do.
This morning I would like to reflect on our gospel lesson from Matthew chapter 14 that Karen just read. I want to hone in on verse 27 “Jesus immediately said to them [his disciples] Take courage! It is I. Don’t be afraid”.
Three short sentences, no sentence more than three words — Take courage! —It is I. — Don’t be afraid.
First sentence: “Take courage”. It took courage for Peter to get of the boat and walk on the water, to attempt something he had never done before, something beyond his human experience, something outside of his comfort zone –something beyond his rational, cognitive being — something that takes total faith and trust. The safe place is in the boat. The safe place will always be in the boat. Getting out of the boat is risky and being a risk taker requires courage. A well known Anglican evangelist once said there are three kind of “takers” in this world, caretakers, undertakers and risk takers. If nothing else Peter was a risk taker. Throughout the scriptures risk-taking for the sake of Christ was one of Peter’s most admirable qualities and God wants us to be risk takers for him too.
What does it mean to have courage. The word itself comes from the French word for heart “coeur”. Literally to have courage means to have heart or to take heart. The dictionary defines courage this way: it is the quality of mind or spirit that enables a person to face difficulty, danger, pain, without fear; bravery. Some synonyms are fearlessness, acting with daring and an intrepid boldness, pluck, spirit, “guts”. What we are about to do in this convention will take courage. It will take courage from all of us, both clergy and laity and both re-aligners and re-organizers. It is a courageous act to acknowledge the truth — to acknowledge that our differences cannot be reconciled without one side or the other capitulating to the other. That will not happen ”“nor should it. Among other things, many in the majority and many in the minority have diametrically different beliefs about the nature of sin, about the meaning and scope of salvation and about the authority and interpretation of Scripture. To be true to our beliefs, it would be far better to bless each other in separating, each going our own way than to continue the internecine warfare of winner-take-all. It will take courage to let each other go and to bless each other in the going. We have an opportunity today to make this convention a testimony to love and forbearance among brothers and sisters in Christ. To be a blessing to each other. Do we have the courage to do it? Will we do it? Can we forgo parliamentary shenanigans that in the end will cause more pain and more distrust and bless nobody? Can we get on with it decently and in order?
One of the watchwords from our bishop, first spoken in the fall of 2003, has been — Courage breeds Courage. These words, when first uttered, instantly transversed the whole of the Anglican Communion. They inspired many, including me. But I don’t believe they were meant simply for one side or the other in the divide we find ourselves, but for all of us in this Diocese. Does the courage of Nano Chalfont Walker inspire me to be courageous: it does. Does the courage of Mary Hays encourage Bruce Robison to be courageous, I believe it does. Does the courage of Doug Wicker inspire Doug Toth and vice versa ”“ I believe it does. We may be opponents today but can we be worthy opponents. That is, can we be opponents that honor God and honor each other even as we disagree and as we separate. Can we be amicable as opposed to hostile, even in the midst of strongly held views. That takes heart. That takes courage.
In November 2005 over 3,000 Anglican Christians gathered in Pittsburgh including hundreds from our diocese at the “Hope and A Future Conference”, last month about 300 Anglican Christians from our diocese gathered in Mount Lebanon at the “A Hopeful Future” meeting. Each side is looking to its own future and looking to its future with hope and with confidence. Now is the time for both sides to put the strife of the past behind us and bless each other’s efforts to make their hope a reality.
With courage Peter was able to get out of the boat and walk on the water. When he became afraid ”“ he sank. Will we operate today courageously or fearfully? Will we bless or curse? Will we walk or will we sink? It’s our choice to make.
Second short sentence, “It is I” Jesus reminds Peter of who it is that is calling to him. Only one person calls and only one person saves. ””Jesus Christ. The scriptures say Salvation is found in no one else[than Jesus], for there is no other name given under heaven by which we must be saved.” Without Christ we flounder. The writer to the Hebrews reminds us in chapter 12 verse 2, Let us fix our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of our faith As long as Peter kept his eyes fixed on Jesus he was able to walk on the water but when he began to focus on the storm about him, he sank. Our text says But when he saw the wind, he was afraid and, beginning to sink, he cried out, “Lord, save me!”
Shortly after hearing the news of Bishop Duncan’s deposition, I received an email from the Rt. Rev. Stanley Ntagali of Bishop Masindi-Kitara diocese, who had preached in my parish early last month, he wrote, Dear Rev. David: My wife Beatrice and I would like to assure you and the entire Diocese of Pittsburgh that we are praying for you at this very difficult moment in the history of your Diocese. We know how much you love your dear Bishop Bob Duncan and have enjoyed his ministry over the years. We are praying for Bishop Bob and Nara too. We pray that God will give you his peace and you will have courage to withstand the storm. Was that a timely prayer! A coincidence? I don’t think so””Just like Peter, the appeal is for courage to withstand the storm.
Peter cries out “Lord, save me!” Only one person calls and only one person saves. First Jesus calls out to Peter “It is I” and then as he is sinking Jesus saves Peter. Our text says verse in 31, “Immediately Jesus reached out his hand and caught him. Bible teacher and Episcopal priest Chuck Irish once said, “If you don’t think you are helpless and in need of a Savior perhaps you are still helpless and in need of a Savior. God loves us so much that he was willing to offer his only Son so that we might not only be saved but that we might be transformed, made new, made whole, delivered and set free from a life of sin and death —transferred from the Kingdom of darkness into his marvelous light. That’s the good news, brothers and sisters. The gospel isn’t an affirmation of who we are in our sin but a transformation from it. There’s change involved
I came to know Christ as my Lord and Savior in 1981 through the witness of a priest of this diocese. He had the courage, the heart, to share the gospel with me. And it was good news for me. Before I responded to this free gift of God’s grace, I was, as St Paul reminds us in Ephesians “without God and without hope in the world”. My life was aimless. Like Peter I was unfocussed and sinking fast. Adrift, without direction, I lived from one day to next without a thought of tomorrow. I was self-centered and I was self-directed, lost in my sin and separated from God. Just like with Peter on the water, Jesus reached out his hand and caught me. He saved me, rescued me from my sin. The Bible says, “While we were yet sinners Christ died for us ”“the godly for the ungodly”. He didn’t wait till I cleaned up my act. He didn’t demand I work harder, or do better. He snatched me up as is — “Just as I am, without one plea!”. But he didn’t leave me there. He transformed me. He gave me new direction in my life, joy, peace and contentment. He gave me deeper love for my wife and children. He gave me a depth of commitment to my family which had been so very weak. After I surrendered my life to Christ, I strived to be Christ- centered rather than me-centered. And my life has never been the same since. Thanks be to God.
Third and last sentence, Jesus said “Don’t be afraid”. This third and last sentence reminds me of the first words uttered to the faithful by John Paul II upon becoming Pope. “Do not be afraid to open your heart to Jesus… I’m begging you, please do not be afraid.” Brothers and sisters, we have nothing to fear. God is with us in this. He really is.
In this great debate we have been having these past years I have heard many analogies to past wars and inspiring war leaders, men like Thomas Paine, George Washington, Abraham Lincoln and Winston Churchill and even Neville Chamberlain and Marshall Petain. Even the title of this convention “A house divided against itself cannot stand” from Matthew 12:25 was quoted most famously by Lincoln.
In the midst of the Civil War a question was asked of President Lincoln. The inquirer said: “Mr. President, we trust during this time of trial in which the nation is engaged, God is on our side, and will give us victory.” Lincoln replied: “Sir, my concern is not whether God is on our side. My great concern is to be on God’s side. For God is always right!” I think Mr. Lincoln was right on target.
If we act out of godly motives, with godly love toward each other then both sides will be on God’s side and no matter which side carries the vote, both sides will win in the end. And if that be the case we have nothing to fear. Moses spoke these words to the people of Israel as they prepared to engage the Amorites, “Be strong and courageous. Do not be afraid or terrified [because of them], for the LORD your God goes with you; he will never leave you nor forsake you.” So it is with us. God has not given us a spirit of fear. He will see every re-organizer and every re-aligner through this challenging time, every one who puts their full faith and trust in him. Can we trust him in this vote. Can we trust that His will for all of us will prevail in this convention today? Can we bless each other as we separate? In the last several years our Bishop’s final blessing has often begun with these words of St. Paul from I Corinthians 16:12-14. Be watchful; stand firm in the faith; be courageous; be strong. Let all that you do be done in love. Let it be so today and always.
For His sake I pray, Amen.

Of Interest:

Canon 8. Of Property

Section a) Any Congregation or other institution holding or intending to hold title to real property shall be incorporated. Its form of incorporation shall be in accordance with the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and in harmony with the Constitution and Canons of The Episcopal Church and of this Diocese, and the directions of Diocesan Convention.

Section b) All property, real and personal, held by or for the benefit of any Congregation of this Diocese is held in trust for the Diocese and The Episcopal Church. The existence of this trust, however, shall in no way limit the power and authority of the Congregation otherwise existing over such property so long as the congregation remains a part of, and subject to, this Church and its Constitution and Canons.

Read them all.

Read them all.

Check them out.

The voting results are here and some more information on the candidate, who once served in South Carolina, is there.

Local Episcopalians are scheduled to meet today to elect a new bishop, one more step toward mending a feud that saw their last leader retire in early 2006.

Delegates in the Diocese of Southern Virginia will choose from six candidates during voting at Powhatan High School, west of Richmond.

The winner will succeed Bishop David C. Bane Jr. and lead more than 30,000 Episcopalians in a territory stretching from the Eastern Shore to the Appalachians.

The only candidate from the diocese, which includes Hampton Roads, is the Rev. Herman “Holly” Hollerith IV, 53, a priest at Bruton Parish in Williamsburg.

Read it all.