Dear Brothers and Sisters in Christ,
Yesterday was a difficult day in the House of Bishops and the Episcopal Church. I want you to hear directly from me about the House of Bishops’ vote to depose the Bishop of Pittsburgh for abandoning the communion of this Church. The House of Bishops reached this decision after weighing considerable evidence. We also prayed and listened intentionally to each other; our decision was careful and informed.
The Bishop of Pittsburgh has led the efforts to separate the Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh from The Episcopal Church by advocating for changes in the accession clause in that diocese’s constitution and canons. He also supports a canonical change which would move the diocese to the Province of the Southern Cone. His actions supporting these changes were never in dispute. Critically, he presided at the Diocesan Convention in 2007 at which the change in the constitution of diocese was approved in the first reading. His failure to rule the resolution out of order and his clear advocacy for its full passage at the upcoming convention in October by a second vote are demonstrative. The judgment of the House of Bishops was that by these actions Bishop Duncan made an open renunciation of the discipline of this church, thereby abandoning the communion of this Church.
There is an effort underway to suggest that the House of Bishops did not follow the canons of our Church in these proceedings. However these are the same procedures followed in three other depositions in the last few years, none of which were protested under the rules of the House of Bishops. When these procedures were challenged, the House of Bishops sustained the ruling of the president. It has also been suggested that the abandonment of communion proceedings do not permit the bishop in question the benefit of due process. Bishop Duncan could have ended these proceedings at any time by re-committing to the order and discipline of this Church and pledging to halt the contemplated actions of the convention by ruling the anticipated vote out of order when it was presented to the convention. Furthermore, he could have come before the house and offered a vigorous defense. His failure to do either places the outcome completely on his shoulders.Finally, I believe that yesterday’s action is essential to maintain the order and discipline of our Church and the collegiality of the House of Bishops. It permits the Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh to move forward. Some individuals may decide not to do so, but your House of Bishops has empowered those committed to the mission of the Episcopal Church to carry forward that ministry in the Diocese of Pittsburgh. We acted as responsible pastors and stewards of the Church. I fully support the actions of our House of Bishops and voted for this action.
As followers of Jesus, we are called to forgive, yet we must also hold each other accountable. We must also pray for peace for all involved in these difficult events. I ask your prayers for Bishop Duncan and his family. Pray also for the people of the Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh.
Faithfully,
(The Rt. Rev.) James R. Mathes is Bishop of San Diego
Closing the barn doors after the horse has walked out of his own free will. Larry
Same old, same old from the same old, same old.
[blockquote]Critically, he presided at the Diocesan Convention in 2007 at which the change in the constitution of diocese was approved in the first reading. His failure to rule the resolution out of order and his clear advocacy for its full passage at the upcoming convention in October by a second vote are demonstrative.[/blockquote]
Interesting. Mathes is saying it’s bad when a bishop of Christ’s church doesn’t prevent, even encourages, a diocean convention to say they don’t agree with innovative theology and doctrine and insist something be done about it. But, bishops need to stand out of the way and go with the flow when the General Convention approves something out of Christianity’s left field.
[blockquote]Finally, I believe that [b]yesterday’s action is essential to maintain[/b] the order and discipline of our Church and [b]the collegiality of the House of Bishops[/b].[/blockquote]
So, let me see if I can follow this logic. So a devisive move deposing of a dissenting bishop who has not yet officially committed the crime via something close to a backroom closed door trial and making a living martyr out him is going to lead to more collegiality and not less.
Indeed. Well, good luck with that.
My take of that, Archer, is that it will be a more collegial place (the H.O.B.) if everyone thinks alike, dresses alike, votes for the same candidates, then there will be no “issues” anymore.
[blockquote]However these are the same procedures followed in three other depositions in the last few years, [b]none of which were protested [/b]under the rules of the House of Bishops.
[b]When these procedures were challenged[/b], the House of Bishops sustained the ruling of the president. [/blockquote]
Which is it, either they were or were not protested. It cannot be both. He is contradicting himself.
[blockquote] Bishop Duncan could have ended these proceedings at any time by re-committing to the order and discipline of this Church and pledging to halt the contemplated actions of the convention by ruling the anticipated vote out of order when it was presented to the convention. Furthermore, he could have come before the house and offered a vigorous defense. His failure to do either places the outcome completely on his shoulders.[/blockquote]
As a man of integrity, I could not see the +Duncan bowing to such pressure just to retain his position. And even if he had moved to stop the vote the good people of DioPitt would have made their voices heard and their feelings know to the TEC in other ways.
My prayers are with them and their supporters.
The world knows that +Duncan’s faked ‘deposition’ was simply a chess move dictated by David Beers & Co in anticipation of the civil suits to come. The B of SD is attempting a smokescreen over the true purpose of his actions (again).
Basin! Basin?! Whose got the basin and the water?!
Come on, fellows. Show trial’s over and I need a symbolic act here!
Now!
Basin!
Didn’t this purple-shirted misleader get elected as a moderate, a unifier?
How does spiking your own canons maintain “order and discipline”?