Church Times: Robert Duncan warns the English

THE Rt Revd Bob Duncan, the former Bishop of Pittsburgh in the Episcopal Church in the United States, deposed from holy orders by the Presiding Bishop last month for “abandoning communion” after his diocese realigned itself with the Province of the Southern Cone, has warned that English traditionalists could find themselves similarly threatened……

At a press conference in London last Friday, Bishop Duncan said that the Episcopal Church in the US had treated him “unjustly and uncan­on­ically”. He had been deposed, two weeks after his diocese’s vote to leave the Episcopal Church, under a canon designed to remove those who had become RCs or Pres­byterians or who had lost their faith. But he expected to be re-elected by the diocese at a Convention on 7 November. “I will have been both the 7th Bishop of Pittsburgh and the 8th Bishop of Pittsburgh, and I didn’t die in between.”

Read it all.

print

Posted in * Anglican - Episcopal, Episcopal Church (TEC), TEC Conflicts, TEC Conflicts: Pittsburgh

10 comments on “Church Times: Robert Duncan warns the English

  1. PeterFrank says:

    There is one very basic mistake in this article. Bishop Duncan was of course “deposed” by The Episcopal Church [b]before[/b] the diocese realigned.

  2. Todd Granger says:

    How can they not have the chronology of his deposition for abandonment of communion and the [i]subsequent[/i] vote by the Pittsburgh diocesan convention to amend their diocesan constitution correct?

    Their error makes Bishop Duncan’s claim that his deposition was unjust and uncanonical sound like so much empty pleading, when the correct chronology makes patently obvious the truth of his claim.

    Was this intentional or was it simply a matter of indolence on the part of the writer?

  3. Cennydd says:

    Somehow, I don’t think that Bishop Duncan cares about what Schori and her lapdog think, say, or do. Neither do the rest of us. His “deposition” isn’t worth the paper it’s printed on.

  4. Cole says:

    Cennydd: You are partially right, but the Court of Common Pleas and the court of public opinion may care.

  5. Cole says:

    … not what KJS thinks, but the chronology.

  6. Stuart Smith says:

    I nominate Bp. Duncan to be an honorary “Texan”. He’s definitely got the right stuff!!!

  7. libraryjim says:

    I didn’t see anyplace on the Church Times website for comments or ‘contact us’ to let them know of their error in the timeline. If anyone is a subscriber, perhaps they can send off a ‘letter to the editor’ asking for a correction?

    In His Peace
    Jim E. <><

  8. MikeS says:

    That this story gets its facts so blatantly wrong in the lead says the rest of the story is similarly flawed. Good journalists write their story in the first two-three paragraphs in case an editor decides to overwork his or her blue pencil down to the nub.

    I would say that such an obvious mangling of facts does not reflect well on the Church Times’ attempts to report on the situation in CoE or the wider Anglican Communion with regards to the growing theological and ecclesiastical fault lines inside Anglicanism.

  9. Jon says:

    Hi LibraryJim. I wrote the Church Times this morning. You have to do some hunting but there is a CONTACT US link at the very bottom of the page. I sent my letter to Helen Saxbee, the news editor.

    Here’s what I wrote:

    Thanks for the great story on Bishop Duncan! (See below.) There was, however, an unintended but crucial error in the piece. Bill Bowder writes that Bob Duncan was “deposed… after his diocese realigned itself with the Province of the Southern Cone….”

    Crucial to understanding the gross violations of canonical process, noted in the article, is observing that Duncan was deposed BEFORE his diocese realigned itself. That’s very important. Duncan was deposed for having INTENTIONS that the Presiding Bishop disapproved of.

    Of course there’s also the very legitimate point (which Bill Bowder makes) which is that the notion of abandonment of communion was originally intended for persons who had abandoned the apostolic faith, or who had left the Anglican Communion for (say) the Presbyterian church. It was never intended to permit the deposition of an Anglican bishop who remained fully Anglican and fully orthodox.

    But it’s crucial to observe that, even if TEC’s understanding of the abandonment clause were correct, Duncan was deposed BEFORE his diocese realigned and before he had himself joined the Province of the Southern Cone. Even on TEC’s own self-understanding of the clause (abandonment of TEC) Duncan was deposed when neither he nor his diocese had left TEC.

    Many thanks for the great work you all do at CT. Blessings,

  10. New Reformation Advocate says:

    I’d like to refocus our attention on a different aspect of this article, which the author has highlighted, i.e., that what happened in the US could also happen in the UK. Now granted, the conservative wing of the C of E is immensely larger and more powerful than the conservative wing of TEC, but the way the General Synod voted in July over the matter of removing all real protection for opponents of ordination of women to the episcopate does make Bishop Duncan’s warning seem pertinent to me.

    There are many of us who have served as lay or ordained leaders in liberal dioceses who can testify to the sad irony that +Bob Duncan the Lion-Hearted is decrying, i.e., that liberals, once they have consolidated power in their own hands, often turn very illiberal and intolerant indeed.

    David Handy+