So what did happen at convention? Actually quite a bit happened, and some of it was pretty positive. First, our bishop, though obviously quite contemplative during the convention Eucharist and the opening business session (and clearly focused upon what he was going to include in his convention address) quite boldly stood squarely on the side of “doing the right thing” and standing firm in upholding the constitution and canons of TEC against the blatant abuses of power by the Presiding Bishop of TEC, her chancellor and the House of Bishops. Knowing full well that the PB’s eyes and ears were present in our convention hall, your bishop stood tall and not only outlined the abuses of power that have occurred in three recent depositions of orthodox bishops, but declared that these types of abuses must be opposed and stopped. In the Alice in Wonderland world that is TEC at this time, this action is no small thing.
Four resolutions were proposed for consideration, three of which were approved by large margins. Two of the resolutions addressed the Communion Partners Plan which +MacPherson favors as a structure for the support of orthodox Episcopalians during the completion of the Windsor Process and pending a vote on the anticipated Anglican Covenant. Both passed overwhelmingly. The other two addressed the deposition of Bishop Robert Duncan of the Diocese of Pittsburgh. One of the resolutions dealt directly with the Duncan deposition and the abuse of constitutional and canonical process in securing the deposition. I had the pleasure of speaking in favor of that resolution and it passed. The second Duncan resolution did not pass and it appears to me that it did not pass principally because it sought to cite a statement by the Primates Council of GAFCON that condemned the Duncan deposition but that also called for the establishment of a separate province in North America for orthodox Anglicans (I also voted for that resolution). At this point in the life of our diocese, the overwhelming view of both the clergy and the lay orders is that we are not willing to speculate about a new province and, for now at least, our diocese prefers to work within the existing Anglican structures and particularly toward our consideration of an Anglican covenant.
What ever happened to Bp. MacPherson’s pledge to lead his diocese out of ECUSA if ECUSA persisted in its apostasies?
It was obviously a lot of baloney, like all such pledges by CEOs of an organization that is so hopelessly Erastian (with the exception of +Schifield, +Duncan and, soon, +Ackerman and +Iker) as TE”C”.