AP: Episcopal Church acts against Pittsburgh bishop

An Episcopal committee says that conservative Pittsburgh Bishop Robert Duncan has “abandoned the communion of this church” ”” a potential first step toward stripping him of religious authority in the denomination.

The committee blocked the national Episcopal Church from imposing the penalty of “inhibition,” which would have barred him from performing religious duties. But the Episcopal House of Bishops is expected to consider imposing the punishment near the end of this year.

Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori, who notified Duncan that he had abandoned the communion on Tuesday, told Duncan that she sought permission to inhibit him.

Read it all.

print

Posted in * Anglican - Episcopal, Episcopal Church (TEC), Presiding Bishop, TEC Bishops, TEC Conflicts

15 comments on “AP: Episcopal Church acts against Pittsburgh bishop

  1. Eugene says:

    Both sides need to stop using words with different meanings
    1. Of course Bishop Duncan has not abandoned “the church”.
    2. Of course Bishop Duncan will abandon the (P)ECUSA, which is the meaning of the term “the church” that the PB uses.
    3. Bishop Duncan will not abandon “the (Anglican) Communion”
    4. Bishop Duncan will abandon the communion of churches in the (P)ECUSA

    So when the Dio. of Pittsburgh leaves the (P)ECUSA lets all use the same language. They will vote to leave (not to stay!) and that means they are not willing to abide in the PECUSA. There will be consequences to that (especially in the smaller parishes) but the leaders of the Dio. must know those consequences and they have decided to “go” anyway.

    In the end there will be more faithful Christians that choose to stay in the PECUSA than those that leave. Those that leave will not think that those that stay are faithful. But some will choose to stay because to leave would effectively dissolve small parishes that are split on the issue at hand. One small church split into two may mean no church at all.

  2. Philip Snyder says:

    I weep for what the Episcopal Church has become. It used to be a somewhat dignified place where disagreements did not mean lawsuits. It was a place where I met Jesus Christ serving at the altar of Trinity Cathedral in Omaha. I met Jesus again in the EYC there and at the top of Camp San Joachin. I met Jesus in many faithful priests such as Dean Fricke or bishops such as Bishop Rivera in Merced. In the Episcopal Church, I learned that the first apologetic for the Christian Faith was “see how they love each other.” I learned that God loves me as I am, but He loves me enough not to leave me where I am. I learned that I am a sinner in need of a savior and that Savior is God the Son who became human so I could be made into the person God created me to be. I learned to “worship the Lord in the beauty of holiness” in magnifican cathedrals, modern parishes and even among the trees and in “the book of nature.”
    Today, the Episcopal Church is known as “the gay church” or “the church that sues its former members.” Our most famous bishop is either Spong or Robinson. We are known more for our arguments and problems more than our faithfulness.

    Why is this? I’m not sure, but I believe that Kendall has it right that we have been exiled and are under judgement. What is the solution? First, recover our faithfulness to what God has revealed in Holy Scripture. Second, endure the period of exile with patience, prayer, and fasting. Third, show our joy in Jesus Christ so that we will sing the songs of Jerusalem among the foreign lands. Finally, wait upon God and act when we are sure that He is moving. Remember that the Church always looks like it is lost just before a Reformation!

    YBIC,
    Phil Snyder

  3. wildfire says:

    An interesting comment about these events from the editor (Canon Terry Wong?) of the Global South Anglican [url=http://www.globalsouthanglican.org/index.php/comments/tec_updates_san_joaquin_and_now_pittsburg/]website[/url]:

    Ed’s observation: TEC should consider whether she is closing whatever channels still left for reconciliation by taking such punitive actions and going against the advice of the Primates at Dar Es Salaam. The rest of the Communion will not sit idly by.

  4. Bob from Boone says:

    Mark, I would tell the editor that I see no evidence that +Duncan et al. are conciliable. The responses to TEC’s actions these past few years have been “you are damned if you do these things; and we find you guilty of apostacy or heresy or at least sin, and you are damned if you don’t repent.” +Schofield forced the PB’s hand, and it is very clear that +Iker and +Duncan mean the same. I also think that this editor does not speak for “the rest of the Communion.”

  5. evan miller says:

    #2
    Beautifully said.

  6. chips says:

    Bob,
    There is plenty of room for reconcilliation within the Anglican Communion. TEC needs to recognize (and I think it does) that it has chosen a path that many traditional Christians cannot in good faith follow. It should be charitable and let those parishes who cannot go down that path leave in peace – with their churches so that they can continue to worship in them. I think TEC could then better focus on its new mission/theology without intercine strife. If they took the above course they might get the heat turned off of them internationally within the communion. As an Attorney – I find that most situations should be resolved early and with both sides not expected total victory. Beggar thy neighbor scorthced earth tactics are decidedly un-Christian.

  7. Words Matter says:

    [i]“you are damned if you do these things; and we find you guilty of apostacy or heresy or at least sin, and you are damned if you don’t repent.” [/i]

    Was it not Bob from Boone who complained yesterday (or the day before) that someone used quotes on a statement the commenter himself made up; so BfB, can you provide the source for this quoted statement.

    Of course, we will all be damned if we don’t repent our sins. It is the nature of sin to separate us from God, that separation being the definition of damnation.

  8. TomRightmyer says:

    Clear and frequently repeated statements from the leadership of the General Convention that the agreement of the House of Bishops on the interpretation of B033 made at New Orleans is firm and for the forseeable future, final, and actions that show that those who accept the moral authority of Lambeth 1.10 have an equal place in the counsels of the church with those who reject it may help.

    One problem is that the legal actions have not been balanced by any actions of reconciliation. Many feel that trust has been broken and that there is no place for them in the present church as governed by General Convention.

    Tom Rightmyer in Asheville, NC

  9. Pageantmaster Ù† says:

    #3 Yes Mark that is very interesting.

  10. Alice Linsley says:

    The comments on that thread at Global South Anglican are interesting also. Go here: http://www.globalsouthanglican.org/

  11. Nikolaus says:

    [blockquote] It used to be a somewhat dignified place where disagreements did not mean lawsuits.[/blockquote]

    That was in the days when the church was center to right-of-center. In other words, before the liberals took over.

  12. archangelica says:

    Philip in Dallas expresses well the lament many of us feel. God save us from ourselves. I wonder though…if the tables were turned and the situation were reversed i.e. the reasserters were in the majority and had so influenced the culture at 815 on down to the parishes and the General Convention. Let’s say that a strong stand was made at GC coming out robustly against GLBT affirmation, blessings and ordinations. Those liberal parishes most affected and feeling most unwelcome then began seeking to realign with more liberal bishops in other parts of the Communion (i.e. Canada or New Zealand or Scottland). Let us pretend that one of the great reasserters was elected PB (Iker, Duncan, Ackerman). Does anyone really believe that the “Institutional Machine” now controlled by orthodox Anglicans would allow 60 or so parishes nationwide and a couple of smaller dioceses to depart with property (some of which is of historic value and significance) in tow, etc. etc. and that no legal action would be taken but all the disgruntled liberals would be given “kind seperation packages” and a charitable farewell sealed with a holy kiss? Does anybody really beleive this? What I mean to say is this. I think the very lamentable fractures, realignments and legal action would all happen in pretty much the same way it is now. It’s what institutions do to preserve and protect themselves no matter who is in the majority or who the minority when it occurs. This is how power behaves whenever it is threatened. How might the outcome be different? Only if a Saint (I mean this with all seriousness) were elected PB, one who could act against all the legal advice and machinations that whirl into gear in defense of the status quo. It would take a Saint (reasserter or reappraiser) not to take the well meaning advice of the institutional minions that surround him or her as advisors, specialists, etc. Perhaps, if it does not destroy her, Bishop Katherine may become Saint Katherine but almost everything is set up and stacked against that ever happening. When I see her on the clips and feeds from the legal proceedings I see a woman in a desperate situation surrounded by wolves in clerical collars whose job is to influence her to save the machine! She clearly does not relish any of this and is trying to keep as much of the Church she inheireted (already soul sick and in crisis) together as possible. She acts like she hates what she is being made to do but is doing what all her advisors are telling her she MUST in order to save an historic church. May god give her the graces to shock and surprise US ALL and to do the right thing no matter what her cronies tell her. This church needs a miracle. I don’t know that it will get one but I do know it belongs to a God who is able. However you feel about Katherine, pray for her soul. Please God that she find a way, even at great cost to self, to speak Truth to power in Jesus name.

  13. Br_er Rabbit says:

    [blockquote] This church needs a miracle. [/blockquote] Truer words are seldom said, Angelica.

  14. Philip Snyder says:

    Archangelica – To answer your question, let’s look at those dioceses where reasserters hold the reigns of power. In SJC, Bishop Schofield has allowed any parish that does not owe the diocese money to leave. In Ft. Worth, Bishop Iker is working with Bishop Stanton to let parishes that wish to, transfer their oversight to Dallas. I believe in Pittsburg, Bishop Duncan has said that any parishes that wish to leave the Diocese of Pittsburg or to have an different bishop come for confirmations etc will be allowed to do so.

    So, it would seem that the reasserters tend to be more forgiving with the reigns of power than the reappraisers.

    YBIC,
    Phil Snyder

  15. Now Orthodox says:

    “Historic church”……quite true….once…. The once great ‘bride’ of Christ has shown herself to be a harlot, deflowering and debasing herself in the public square through her lack of virtue, holiness and humility; her actions resemble a ‘pro’ digging through her john’s wallet in an effort to exact her just due for her services rendered. Now she will fade into history…..a footnote probably somewhere.

    I was once proud to be an Episcopalian, but no longer can I say that after over five decades of membership and service. Adios! Pray for the lost souls of the secular and humanist institution of TEC.
    Peace,
    Barry