The Rev. Peter Keese, president of the Standing Committee, announced today that the Rev. Joseph R. Parrish, Jr. has been nominated by petition to stand for election as bishop, joining four other nominees, in our diocesan election scheduled for February 12, 2011 at St. John’s Cathedral in Knoxville. Fr. Parish was nominated by three clergy and three lay persons from the diocese and has completed all the background checks that every nominee must undergo. The petition process closed December 3, and no more nominees will be added to the slate.
Some further information about this latest nominee may be found there.
That link says he’s 69…isn’t the mandatory retirement age 72?
From Parrish’s service in the Diocese of New Jersey and the “inclusive” character of DioETN, Parrish should be a fitting representative. See paste below from [url=http://www.etdiocese.net/pages/inclusivity.php]Bishop’s Committee on Inclusivity – Inviting Reasonable and Holy Conversations on Same Gender Relationships[/url]:
[blockquote]The Bishop’s Committee on Inclusivity, composed of clergy and lay, gay and straight, men and women, began meeting in spring 2009 to seek discernment, pray, plan and work toward inviting reasonable and holy conversations on same gender relationships.
The committee’s purpose is to increase awareness among East Tennessee parishioners about the theological diversity regarding issues of sexuality within the Episcopal Church as it relates to non-heterosexual intimate partnerships. We propose to do this by engendering conversations at the parish level regarding this matter.
While we know that these conversations may be difficult, and that many viewpoints are represented within the Diocese, we believe that we can come together for holy and reasonable discussions about same-gender relationships, as we wrestle with what it means to be Christ’s people in the world. …
[b]What can I do?[/b]
• Think about ways that our community might be led to
respond to requests from our gay and lesbian members.[/blockquote]
‘Nuff said.
Even if he is a native of E Tenn, all his service (and nearly all his adult life, as far as I can see) have been in the urban northeast. I wonder how well the the skills needed to run a large parish in a NJ city would transfer to the rural life of eastern Tennessee?
Given his probable theological stance, I suspect the world (and the Lord) might have been better served if he had remained in pharmacology.
Would somebody please explain to me why Diocesan nominating committees almost always choose nominees from OUTSIDE their diocese. Since the Bishop is supposed to be the Chief Pastor of a Diocese, it would make sense to “promote from within.” If I were on a committee looking for a Bishop, the first people I would look for would be 1)Rectors of the Cardinal parishes in the Diocese, 2) Diocesan Canons and Archdeacons, 3)Any Assistant Bishops who are currently serving in that Diocese.
Why “start from scratch” when you have a “farm team” which would tend to “keep things going along” rather than making major changes.
(Note, This is very different than “promoting” a curate to rector-since the Curate of a parish along with other assistant clergy are chosen by the Rector!!)
Recchip,
I would have thought that an obvious answer might be that a bishop promoted from “inside” has already built relationships with certain clergy and laypeople that may lead him or her to favor (or distrust) them over the needs of the Diocese as a whole. An outsider is more likely to come to the job with a clean slate.
One of the reasons that Bob Duncan had to be put on the ballot by petition back in the mid-1990s was that there was a suspicion among some in Pittsburgh that he had been too much “Alden Hathaway’s man” while Canon to the Ordinary.
[url=http://catholicandreformed.blogspot.com]Catholic and Reformed[/url]
In some dioceses (like mine), they tend to elect homegrown talent. But it often ends up being a popularity contest, and not a reverent moment soaked in prayer.
What I find interesting is the amount of “promoting from within” that goes on in episcopal elections, given the effort to find suitable candidates from outside dioceses. Although I am not a fan of Louie Crew’s website nor its intended purpose, it does give some remarkable statistical insight into events such as this.
Recchip,
I tend to favor who the Holy Spirit is calling to be the bishop, whether it be someone from within or without. I agree completely with Jeremy Bonner, and would add this: Sometimes a diocese needs a fresh voice from outside of the diocese – someone with new ideas who can take the diocese in a new direction.
For almost all its history, the Diocese of New Jersey elected only members of its own clergy to become bishop – and often men who had grown up in NJ and had served there virtually all their time as priests. In the 1990’s they elected someone from outside the diocese, for either the first time ever or the first time in over a century.
He proved to be an absolute disaster. They had to agree to pay him some vast sum so that he would retire. I forget his name, but it took quite an effort to get him out.
The current bishop, George Counsell, also came from outside the diocese, but he has been a very good bishop – but he had quite a job on his hands to clean up after his predecessor.
Fr Parrish seems to be something of a combination of an outsider and an insider, since he has served in NJ but has kept in close touch with the people in E Tenn.
TW+, I am afraid that there are few in ECUSA (and in E Tenn) who know how to listen to the Holy Spirit, for many of today’s clergy think of God as a concept and not as a Trinity of persons who can communicate.
I read a study a number of years ago that said that prior to the Second War in the Episcopal Church a very substantial majority of priests served their entire ministry in the diocese in which they were baptized, and a very substantial majority of bishops were elected in the diocese in which they had been ordained priest. I do agree with comments about how sometimes a “breath of fresh air” from the outside may be a good or even necessary thing. But it does seem to me that two essential characteristics of the person holding episcopal office–psychological/emotional stability and spiritual maturity–are not always easy to judge from 90-minute “walkabouts” and the standard interview/search process. It helps to know someone well, over the course of years, in the particular context of the community in which the ministry of pastoral oversight is going to be exercised. I suppose it’s always something of a crap shoot, but the more modern tendency to elect strangers and then hope for the best makes me a little uneasy. I think the surprising thing is the number of reasonably successful episcopates, given the very odd process we’ve adopted for election.
Bruce Robison