BISHOP BOB DUNCAN of Pittsburgh was officially charged with abandonment of the communion of the church on this very same day! Though the Review Committee endorsed the charges brought by the PB, the three senior diocesan bishops would not consent to his being inhibited from functioning as a bishop, as they had done in the same charges brought against Bishop John-David Schofield of the Diocese of San Joaquin just last week. The essential difference in the two cases is that San Joaquin approved measures to separate from The Episcopal Church with a second, ratifying vote on December 8th, whereas the Pittsburgh Convention approved of their measures at the preliminary, first reading vote in November, an action which will need to be ratified at the 2008 Convention. Fort Worth is in the same position as Pittsburgh.
BISHOP STANTON OF DALLAS AND I had a very good meeting yesterday at St. Vincent’s, where we discussed how to make provision for any parishes in this Diocese that may choose to remain in TEC if the Diocesan Convention votes to separate from The Episcopal Church. We were joined by our Canons to the Ordinary, the Presidents of our respective Standing Committees, and the Chancellor of the Diocese of Dallas. You will be hearing more about this in due course.
How appropriate it is for the diocese of Dallas to participate in making plans for these few clergy and, perhaps, parishes! Dallas and Fort Worth are mother/daughter, if not sister dioceses. How much more sense that would make than what is happening in San Joaquin, with three parishes struggling to reconstitute a vanished diocese.
#1
Don’t expect this to make sense for long. I suspect that 815 will have nothing to do with such an arrangement. They will not recognize that Fort Worth has left. Only people can leave TEC, don’t you know. Beside, consider the agenda of the meeting called by Bishop Hulsey. It was for people “who are committed to keeping this Diocese in The Episcopal Church, no matter what.” This would suggest that there is no interest in some kind of an arrangement with Dallas. Alas, things will continue to not make sense.
Doug Hale+
#2, I’m afraid you’re right that JKS and Mr. Beers won’t recognize any amicable arrangement Bishops Iker and Stanton work out, but God bless +Iker and +Stanton for trying.
There is another way to see this. The reality that some “senior” bishops of TEC aren’t happy with the regime of KJ Schori. They knew that approving 815’s actions againt Bishop Schofield would have no real effect, since he and the Diocese of San Joachin were already safely under the jurisdiction of Archbishop Venables.
That being the case, the threats from 815 against +Iker and +Duncan are reactionary and the PB has no real power to depose them. It will ultimately disheartening for Schori, Beers, et al to continue this present line of attack on right believing bishops. Contrary to their belief about themselves, they will discover that they aren’t in control and can’t subdue the Holy Spirit, the Incarnate Word, angels and spiritual forces of light.
Alice, it is the HOB that has the power to depose.
I think that +KJS runs a real risk of alienating the HOB moderates. We need to get sympathetic big donors in those dioceses to turn up the heat on those Bishops.
#5: …meaning that the PB and her chancellor are uninvolved bystander? Really?
Was it not the PB’s pressure that turn Bishop Lee on a dime?
To be more accurate, #7, the HOB formally votes to depose and the PB issues the declaration. I do not mean what you have read into my words, a common failing of logic on this blog.
Bob from Boone…or anyone else, for that matter
Not being contentious, but just wondering…why is it that the HOB has the authority to depose bishops, but lacks the authority to not consecrate actively gay bishops.
10- you are parsing semantics unprofitably. Both you and Iker are factually and semantically correct. You are the half empty, he is the half full side of the issue.
9- read the [url=http://www.churchpublishing.org/general_convention/index.cfm?fuseaction=candc]canons, specifically III Ministry[/url]. They go into ‘who does what’ at length. One of the few things the PB does is to lead in episcopal consecrations.
6- LOL. ecusa has plenty of money to weather this storm for the next decade, even losing several financially marginal dioceses in the process.