As ENS notes, the defenders of Title IV claimed their February 2011 response to our original critique \u201cconclusively establishes the constitutionality\u201d\u009d of Title IV. General Convention must have reached a different conclusion. In any event, we invite all concerned about Title IV to read our replies to their defense of Title IV before accepting the characterization that its constitutionality has been established: \u201cTitle IV Unmasked: Reply to Our Critics\u201d\u009d (February 2011) and \u201cTitle IV and the Constitution\u201d\u009d (March 2011). The latter in particular is a comprehensive review of the constitutional provisions for clergy discipline from 1789 to the present. Our own conviction after undertaking this work: \u201cThe conclusion that the 2009 Title IV revision is unconstitutional cannot reasonably be denied.\u201d\u009d Our critics never answered these papers.<\/p>\n