Bishop Lamb noted that his efforts to communicate with alienated clergy have been hampered by the fact that he does not have an updated list of clergy and addresses. That information remains in the possession of the Anglican Diocese of the San Joaquin, led by Bishop John-David Schofield.
On Aug. 4, Bishop Schofield, his standing committee and diocesan council wrote to Bishop Lamb informing him that “we accept the recognition by the Archbishop of Canterbury of our bishop and reject any purported authority of The Episcopal Church, or Bishop Jerry Lamb, over any of our ministries. Our obligation is to conform to the doctrine, discipline, and worship of the world-wide Anglican Communion.”
Bishop Lamb expressed cautious optimism about the Windsor Continuation Group proposals unveiled during the Lambeth Conference.
He’s a phony bishop anyway….he can’t depose a ham sandwich.
My understanding is that he was a retired bishop before he came to San Joaquin. So he is a bishop,
just not the sitting bishop of a valid diocese.
No canonical authority to do so. Though ordained to the episcopacy, he is a faux bishop in a faux diocese complete with a faux standing committee that merely exists on paper based on faux canons dreamt up for the occasion by the Chancellor to a PB with faux powers to act in such a manner per Frank Griswold. Faux on ’em. then!
“1) I want to remain a member of the clergy of the Episcopal Church and adhere to my ordination vows;”
is that not a thinly veiled atempt to imply that any clergy who have left EUCSA are not adhering to their ordination vows?
No letter from him is worth a reply.
[blockquote]My understanding is that he was a retired bishop before he came to San Joaquin. So he is a bishop, just not the sitting bishop of a valid diocese. [/blockquote]
I stand corrected.
I believe that Lamb is an “acting” bishop, who is serving only until a diocesan is elected, and since he is “retired,” it bothers me that he was invited to Lambeth. I suspect that Schori demanded that he be invited, or she would somehow see to it that TEC’s funding for Lambeth would be withheld.
Nonetheless, he is a bogus bishop of a bogus “diocese.”
“This Lambeth Conference was so much better than the last one in 1998,†he continued. “The Archbishop was clear that we would deal with the issues without making statements or decisions.â€
As Mr T would ask, “What are you talking about fool ?” You can not deal with an issue by avoiding it. Besides, he has no canonical authority over the Anglican Diocese of San Joaquin. He is Kate’s minion assigned to annoy people. So, what is he going to do, have a temper tantrum? That is about all the effect it will have on Bishop John-David.
Per #7, I believe Bishop Lamb has status under the Title III canons relating to the election of a Provisional Bishop. Unlike an Assistant Bishop, appointed by a Standing Committee, a Provisional Bishop has the ecclesiastical authority of the Ordinary, though with a term of service that is specified (I believe in Bishop Lamb’s case it is 3 years). Thus the invitation to Lambeth, which would not have been issued to a retired bishop simply assisting during a vacancy.
The Title III canons specify that a Provisional Bishop must be elected by a Convention of the diocese, and there is obviously some controversy around the question of whether the electing convention in the Diocese of San Joaquin (TEC) was constituted by a canonically valid process. I imagine it might be theoretically possible for the TEC House of Bishops to take up a challenge to Bishop Lamb’s election–or, on a separate page, for there to be a challenge to the seating of the deputation from San Joaquin at Anaheim. But of course those challenges wouldn’t go anywhere.
The reality is that there are two dioceses, one of TEC, the other of the Southern Cone, each of which have been recognized by their respective Provinces despite irregularities in the canons of those Provinces. I imagine the courts of California will need to make a judgment about which of these two dioceses represents the legal continuity of the “pre-realigned” Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin.
Bruce Robison
Bruce Robison