According to an e-mail sent this week from David Booth Beers, the chancellor to the presiding bishop, to about two dozen Pittsburgh Episcopalians representing a spectrum of the diocese, he wrote that the Rev. Jefferts Schori would “poll the House of Bishops in April to see when the House would next like to meet to discuss, among other things, the certification respecting Bishop Duncan. It is not accurate to say that she is seeking approval to proceed; rather, she seeks the mind of the House as to when to proceed.”
The next scheduled meeting of the roughly 300-member House of Bishops is in September.
In January, the Rev. Jefferts Schori warned Bishop Duncan he could be removed from office because of his realignment efforts. His response to her will be made public Monday.
Why on Earth does the 300-member HoB meeting matter these days? Can’t KJS, DBB and a few like-minded marionettes gather around a kitchen table and vote +Duncan off Episcopal Island?
Apparently, the canon that the consents of the three most senior bishops are needed is just being ignored. After Bp Wimberly declined to give it for the deposition of +Duncan, they simply are not asking for it as in Bp Cox and Bp MacBurney.
“If the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Most Rev. Rowan Williams, disregarded the deposition of Bishop Duncan, it would be a tantamount admission that the Episcopal Church is out of step with the rest of the communion.”
Interesting days are ahead.
Realignment is the result of sin in Church leadership.
It would be a sin NOT to deal with the sin in Church leadership.
God bless Bishop Duncan for his willingness to act on behalf of the overshepherd and the sheep.
To play off the headline, the fate of Bishop Duncan is safely in the hands of Jesus Christ our savior. One can’t help being reminded of Luther, who wrote…”let goods and kindred go…” I would just like to express my appreciation for the good bishop and the leadership he is giving a flock of so many he will never, never meet.
It does not matter if Bishop Duncan is invted to Lamberth or not. Bishop Duncan will not go to Lambeth. He has stopped attending such gatherings. He only goes where they oppose TEC.
I wish he had attended the HoB meeting last week and voted against the +Cox and +Scofiield depositions. Not being at the meeting is fuel for the PB to say he has abandoned the TEC.
5, it makes no difference. They want to get rid of us all.
#6 As a reappraiser I am firmly in your “they” of “They want to get rid of us all.” This is just not true. I have absolutely no desire for traditionalists to leave TEC. It seems though that any and every concession made to seek to find a way to grant you a degree of alternative oversight from more conservative bishops is never enough for you. All of the plans put forth have been repeatedly and venomously refused for being inadequate. It appears that what reasserters want is to be in TEC in a parrallel universe in which you are not bound to her in any way by any formal structures so that you may feel safeguarded from those whose theology you deplore. I get that. Wouldn’t it be more honest to say that it is the reappraisers who cannot abide the theological shift in TEC and are unwilling to maintain unity and concord because of your disdain to being in even impaired communion with those you percieve to be heretics and infidels? Truth be told, TEC has changed, is changing. You see these changes as wicked, false and misguided and so you want to leave much like the SSPX departed from the Roman Church. Leave if you must but do not pretend you are being forced out. You are rejecting a church you have grown to hate. You feel called to create a more pure, more faithful, more orthodox expression of Anglicanism. Every church break and fragmentation follows the same sad fault lines.
should read…”Wouldn’t it be more honest to say that it is the REASSERTERS who cannot abide…”
#7
[blockquote]“They want to get rid of us all.†This is just not true. I have absolutely no desire for traditionalists to leave TEC. ……[/blockquote]
What you want (re-appraisers) is for us (majority of Pittsburgh Diocese, et al) to give up our faith as we understand it. If we don’t, you will not allow for acceptable clergy and bishops to lead and minister to us in the future. You changed. We didn’t. To sue us for our (AND I SAY OUR) property is a violation of our religious freedom guaranteed by the Bill of Rights. There is absolutely no moral high ground in your position. Only a reach for raw power and a “brave new worldâ€.
We don’t want the traditionalists to leave…we want them to continuing sending in their pledges…and then we want to assimilate them.
The +Mark Lawrence incident and the near countless less publicized replacement of orthodox rectors with increasingly liberal ones make it clear that the orthodox are unwelcome.