Members of the diocese of the Yukon, meeting in Whitehorse on May 31, failed to elect a new bishop, and Archbishop Terrence Buckle said he would postpone his retirement and remain in office.
Archbishop Buckle, who is 67, had said earlier this year that he would retire at the end of 2008. Canadian Anglican bishops generally retire before or at the age of 70.
Through seven rounds of voting, the 35 delegates assembled at Christ Church Cathedral were not able to give any of the five candidates the required simple majority in each of the two houses of clergy and laity as well as an overall two-thirds majority.
Only 7 rounds? Here in Tennessee we voted more than 30 times, over two days, before giving up! We know how to do deadlock here. 🙂
I know what you all will think of this, but here goes:
The Mennonites practice the old method of “the lot” to select pastors and bishops. All of the qualified men meet together and pray for hours and review the needs. Bibles equal to the number of those in attendance are stacked at the front. In one of them is a special marker; the one selecting it will become the sough-after pasror or bishop. Kinda biblical in fact (“they drew lots and the lot fell on Matthias..”). Skips the fake humility as the underground campaigning churns out nothing over and over.
Told you that you wouldn’t like it.
Sorry for the spelling gaffs.
I was still drinking coffeeeeeeeeee.
Is electile dysfunction a word?
Seriously, I wonder if the very small number of voting delegates is part of the problem. 35 people trying to decide between 5 candidates… unless the initial distribution of “camps” is very uneven, each person would have roughly people supporting them. An eventual winner of a 2/3 majority would need their 7 plus 17 additional votes (more than 60% of the remaining delegates, or roughly 4 from each initially opposing group of 7). Pretty tough unless entire blocs swing. And the winner also needs simple majorities in both laity and clergy.
Makes perfect sense to me, Choir Stall. The new bishop would then have no sense of deference to the “party” that campaigned for him. But do we trust the Holy Spirit enough to make the “right” choice?
One of the ironies of Bob Duncan’s election in 1995 (seems a long time ago now) was that he was rejected by the nominations committee – most of whose members shared his theological convictions – and nominated by petition. His nominators included a number of avowdedly liberal clergy who recognized his pastoral qualities as canon to the ordinary. Today they probably regret their generous impulse, but conservatives will owe them a debt if Pittsburgh realigns this fall since without +Bob we probably wouldn’t be where we are now.
[url=http://catholicandreformed.blogspot.com]Catholic and Reformed[/url]
3. Choir, believe it or not, my parish uses the “casting lots” philosophy to select vestry members and it works quite well. A sub-committee of the current vestry vets nominees to a group of candidates; say eight candidates for four open positions. Then the entire parish, at annual meeting, through a random process selects four of the eight to serve.
The objective is to remove personal bias and unfamiliarity with the candidates (we are a large church) from the voting process. The vestry is trusted with selecting eight qualified candidates from those nominated by the parish members, and the Holy Spirit is empowered to determine which of those will serve.
That math does not add up to me. Only 35 delegates, 5 candidates, and only 7 rounds of voting? How was concensus supposed to be formed with those small numbers and that short of a time?
On a lighter note, perhaps the US Democratic party can lend them some superdelegates.
[i]the Holy Spirit is empowered to determine which of those will serve.[/i]
At what point does this become divination, a practice thoroughly condemned by scripture. The classical interpretation (at least the one I’ve always been privy to) is that the election of Matthias by lots, which I will remind you was BEFORE Pentecost, was something of a mistake on the part of the proto-Church. Though Catholic tradition holds that Matthias was a good man and went on to meet a martyrs death, we hear nothing more about him. As my father always said…the Church chose Matthias, God chose Paul. In theory I very much like the idea of removing personal bias and party politics, but attributing the “will of the Holy Spirit” to chance, to the roll of the dice, as it were, strikes me as fraught and (I don’t mean to offend but) frankly somewhat obscene.
Someone else had the idea; cast lots. Cast lots of lots. Ask Katherine Schori, she has experience in small organizations.
[blockquote] electile dysfunction [/blockquote] One free pass to the Laffin’ Place for TWilson.
[size=1][color=red][url=http://resurrectioncommunitypersonal.blogspot.com/]The Rabbit[/url][/color][color=gray].[/color][/size]
Divination is generally defined as the attempt to predict or prophesy the future through supernatural or demonic means. In casting lots, we are removing human influence (as much as is practical). We pray corporately and earnestly for God’s will to be done in the “random” selection of candidates.
RE #8
That may be true, but the early Church apostles also had jobs and worked for their living as well as participated in the life of the Church. Are you also recommending tent-making pastors and bishops like Paul?
The Lot assumes that EVERYONE will be preparing to be selected rather than the loud and obvious. This creates a better quality of leadership, and also assumes a much deeper spiritual life than that of a mere manager.