October 9, 2008
The Rev. Geoffrey Chapman
Mr. Kenneth Herbst
Dr. Theresa Newell
Mr. Wicks Stephens
The Rev. David Wilson
The Rev. Karen Stevenson
Ms. Gladys Hunt-Mason
Dear Sirs and Madams,
I am writing to you because I have been informed that you held positions on the Standing Committee of the Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh prior to and/or during the most recent Convention of the Diocese in October 2008. It has come to my attention that in the past year you have taken actions in support of an attempt to take the Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh out of the Episcopal Church and into an affiliation with the Province of the Southern Cone. I understand that these have included supporting amendment of the Diocese’s Constitution and Canons and attempting to organize as the Standing Committee of an entity that identifies itself as a Diocese of the Province of the Southern Cone. These actions directly conflict with the Constitution and Canons of the Episcopal Church.
Canon I.17.8 of the Episcopal Church provides that “[a]ny person accepting any office in this Church shall well and faithfully perform the duties of that office in accordance with the Constitution and Canons of this Church and of the Diocese in which the office is being exercised.” In light of your recent actions, I find that you have been and are unable to well and faithfully fulfill your duties as members of the Standing Committee of the Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh under Canon I.17.8. Accordingly, with this letter I inform you that I do not recognize you as members of the Standing Committee of the Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh.
I regret the decisions that you have made to attempt to take the Diocese out of the Episcopal Church and the necessary consequences of these actions. I give thanks for your service in the past, and pray that it may once more be a blessing to the Diocese. I remain
Your servant in Christ,
–(The Rt. Rev.) Katharine Jefferts Schori
Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha! Is it halloween yet? Because someone is making believe!
Napoleon complex.
Still wondering what cannon the SC of Pittsburg violated.
I was unaware that TEC had granted papal powers to its presiding bishop.
ICXC
John
[blockquote]Still wondering what cannon the SC of Pittsburg violated. [/blockquote]
She does seem to have omitted that tiny detail, has she not? Essentially, she upbraids them for not following the law, but neglects to inform them of which law they have broken. No matter, however, as another famous port-sider once remarked, show me the man, and I’ll find the crime.
[i]Comment removed. Please focus on the text of the letter. –elves[/i]
Dacama (#3),
[blockquote]
Still wondering what cannon the SC of Pittsburg violated.
[/blockquote]
Of course her letter cites the canon on [em]fiduciary responsibility[/em].
In my opinion the most significant failure of the several members of the former Standing Committee is their failure as fiduciaries to acknowledge the unqualified nature of the accession of a diocese ([em]Constitution[/em], Article V.1). When the step of accession is taken, a diocese surrenders forever its independent existence.
In this sense the relationship between The Episcopal Church and one of its dioceses is like the relationship between The United States and one of its states.
When an individual American moves to another state, he does not risk losing his American citizenship by virtue of any possible future action of the state to which he has moved. Likewise when an Episcopalian moves to another diocese, he does not risk losing his membership in The Episcopal Church by virtue of any possible future action of the diocese to which he has transferred.