Updated again Sunday morning
Episcopal Café has the rollcall of the vote at The post-deposition news conference and minutes.
Saturday morning updates
Further reports from Pittsburgh newspapers:
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette Ann Rodgers Some expected to resist split from Episcopal Church
Pittsburgh Tribune-Review Craig Smith Episcopal bishop’s ouster sets up battle line
And a further report by Pat McCaughan at ENS House of Bishops adjourns Salt Lake City meeting with ‘spirit of commitment’ includes a link to a pdf file containing the official copy of the minutes and the rollcall.
The Diocese of Pittsburgh has set up an additional website, In Support of Bishop Duncan.
The Living Church has published the rollcall vote in a more userfriendly format, and also has News Analysis: Curial Powers Expanded.
Sunday morning updates
For many additional reactions see Bishop reactions to Duncan issue, Saturday edition at Episcopal Café and also see many recent entries at Anglican Mainstream.
The Pittsburgh group Across the Aisle now has a website here with materials and pictures from the recent event A Hopeful Future.
Never heard of +Wallis, but the others voting nay have all been very active and vocal on the anti TEC side. Since several years or decades.
No surprises. But it’s instructive to see how few they really are…
The new sheriff is indeed in town and she will shoot all who threaten her. This is a massive exercise in bullying. Now all the world can see how utterly graceless is this presiding bishop and her pack of ???? who will gladly do what ever they can to annihilate anyone who speaks out against them let alone oppose their plans. Thank God for the 39 who refused to go along with this sham.
Mr. Montgomery calls the actions of the House of Bishops and the Presiding Bishop “bullying,” yet there is no criticism from Mr. Montgomery of the schismatic bishop, formerly of the Episcopal Church, who violated his vows and the canons of the church. Robert Duncan certainly had the right to personally leave the Episcopal Church, just as I have that right and Mr. Montgomery has that right. But when Robert Duncan announced his intended “reaffiliation” then he was effectively no longer part of the Episcopal Church, and the House of Bishops simply recognized the reality and severed Robert Duncan from official… Read more »
Of more moment (possibly) than Ian Montgomery’s frothings: Retired Presiding Bishop of the Southern Cone Colin F. Bazley writes directly to the Archbishop of Canterbury with a list of interesting demands: “I write, therefore, to ask that you take immediate action in suspending the Episcopal Church from any further participation in activities of the Anglican Communion and in calling a meeting of the Primates to give formal recognition to a new Province in North America, as desired by the Common Cause Partners Federation. At that meeting the Primates must give guidance as to the future conduct of the Episcopal Church… Read more »
Hmmm. Whether this was legal and proper or not, I’m trying to decide whether anything was actually gained by TEC by doing this. The diocese is going to withdraw anyway, Duncan can now wear the martyr’s hat, PB and the rest look like overbearing bullies, and now there is a new issue in the mix, i.e., whether this was legally and properly done. So, now Duncan is no longer bishop in TEC, the Standing Committee will take the diocese out anyway, and Duncan (no longer a TEC bishop) can’t be blamed for the act. And, they will be taking him… Read more »
Good gracious, the Hyberbole Fairy is going to have to replenish the stock under a lot of Drama Queens’ pillows tonight. “Martyr!” “Bully!” “Shoot!” “Annihilate!”
It’s quite to give one indigestion… :-X
The Living Church’s relentless SPIN is growing evermore tiresome. “News Analysis: Curial Powers Expanded”: that would be a find headline . . . IF we were talking about the Draft Anglican Covenant!
But no: this is just a further TLC exercise in PB/democratic-majority of the HofB-bashing. For maintaining the canons AS THEY’VE ALWAYS BEEN (though yes, GC can do its part to clarify them. Always room for improvement, IMO!)
“It’s a fearful thing to fall into the hands of ‘The Living Church'”: the joke has more and more truth, w/ each passing day…
Lord have mercy!
Steven, Among those of us in Pittsburgh who support TEC, there is some dispute about the wisdom of deposing Duncan now. Duncan’s (disingenuous) position (seen in filings in the Calvary lawsuit) is that diocesan convention is responsible for “realignment,” not him. The implication is that, if he is innocent now, he will be innocent after the vote. I assert that he is guilty now, and neither a “yes” nor a “no” vote will change that. Deposing Duncan now means that (1) is will assuredly be deposed, and (2) the remaining diocese—Duncan cannot properly remove the diocese from the TEC—can be… Read more »
TEC seems to be a continuous rich source of evidence for the inability of Liberals, having grasped the levers of power, to conform to either Christian orthodoxy or orthopraxy…
Expect further moves to annihilate those who have rejected liberal apostasy and have offended against the gospel of human autonomy!
“Expect further moves to annihilate those who have rejected liberal apostasy and have offended against the gospel of human autonomy”
And how brutal we are! We wait until someone leaves and then confirm that he has left. Makes you shiver, doesn’t it.
“TEC seems to be a continuous rich source of evidence for the inability of Liberals, having grasped the levers of power, to conform to either Christian orthodoxy or orthopraxy… Expect further moves to annihilate those who have rejected liberal apostasy and have offended against the gospel of human autonomy!” Oh, my! First, this applies even better to conservatives, as is manifestly obvious to everyone who doesn’t buy into the myth of the Poor Persecuted Faithful. The bit about “offending against the Gospel of human autonomy is a particular hoot! We Christians believe in the holiness of the community, after all.… Read more »
Erica, you may not have noticed but Pittsburgh is going to decide whether or not to leave on October 4, 2009 ! The canon-misusing “deposition” by a divided court was a preemptive strike. Presumably to try to open the door for a stopper on the diocesan convention, a purported removal of the elected standing committee etc etc. so as to give TEC’s burgeoning legal dept extra arguments in court.. I propose the new Episcopal slogan “TEC WELCOME – SUE!” Ford, I was thinking of what some in the loop expect TEC to do at GC 2009 – to impose liberal… Read more »
I am deeply saddened by this action. It shows that those leading TEC are unable to come together and resolve differences. To look for someone to blame is meaningless as all are to some degree at fault. We as the parishioners caught in the middle. Can any of us feel good when this happens in this branch of Christ’s Holy Catholic Church.
Steven’s martyr complex is showing. The only problem here is that his alleged ‘martyr’ one-time Bishop Duncan, walked into the fire without his protective clothing. One has to learn that to play with fire is to risk buring one’s fingers. Former Bishop Duncan’s hubris has allowed him the painful, but only to be expected, denouement that has come about – not just at the hands of TEC’s Primate alone, but at the hands, and with the agreement, of two-thirds of the House of Bishops. And to entertain the possibility of the ABC’s intervention in this matter (as attempted by a… Read more »
“Ford, I was thinking of what some in the loop expect TEC to do at GC 2009 – to impose liberal heteropraxy on the few orthodox parishes and dioceses that by then remain in TEC. How could you possibly tolerate any more what you have labelled as “sexism” and “homophobia”?” I’m sure the first “threat” is real to you, Steven, most delusions seem perfectly real to the deluded. Even if it were true, so what? Seriously. Do you think Christ gives us the victory or not? Even if evil Godless liberals were to take over the Church (I know, you… Read more »
Ron+ is dead on. Bob Duncan could have stopped his deposition with a reassurance of his commitment to TEC (which he swore an oath/vows to uphold and protect). Bob Duncan did nothing to reassure the HofB’s of his commitment and surprise, surprise, he’s gone. I live in Pittsburgh and I’ve had to deal with Duncan. For those who think the poor Orthodox are being relentlessly hunted being a liberal in Pittsburgh isn’t exactly a picnic. We’re systematically forced out of parishes (I was a member for 38 years, since a baby). Mr. Millard, prominent in the Pittsburgh Re-Alignment is a… Read more »
As someone who does not always agree with Bishop Duncan’s view but respects him very much as a pastor, a leader, and a servant of God, I’m honestly amazed at the hypocrisy we’re seeing in TEC these days. On the one hand, the diocese of New Hampshire is welcome to vote as it pleases in electing its bishop, at the cost of global relations — that’s ok, because it’s a principled stand. On the other hand, the diocese of Pittsburgh is essentially forbidden to follow the leader it has elected, because it’s at odds with TEC’s “majority” position. On the… Read more »
This story is getting a bit out of date. However, the fact is that Bishop Bob Duncan is getting only half-hearted support from other conservatives. Certain elements of the press would love this to be a big story. In fact Katharine Jefferts Schori and the Episcopal Church have done the right thing. It’ll put a stop to some of the madder factions. Very few would want to go down Duncan’s path into an alliance with the oddest of companions who don’t really have anything in common except a hang-up about sexual matters. There’ll be noisy protestations such as from the… Read more »
“Please, the orthodox anglicans can stop the martyr act now!!!”
But where would be the fun, not to mention the comforting self righteousness, in that?
bob in swpa,
Should you not have put your words ‘orthodox anglicans’, in your previous post, in parenthesis?
One of the real problems of the present claims by the dissident asserters is that they are in some way more ‘orthodox’ than those who have chosen to remain part of the Body of Christ in TEC. To allow the dissenters to arrogate to themselves this entirely imaginary capacity for orthodoxy is surely to fall in with the mistaken idea of their remaining part of the Anglican Communion – as recognised by, and relating to, the original Province of Canterbury.
K:
It’s a question of vows and canons. New Hampshire, in electing Gene Robinson, violated no vows or canons. Bob Duncan, in leading his diocese out of TEC (and he IS leading it, the proposal was his), IS violating vows and canons. The comparison is ludicrous.
K
“On the other hand, the diocese of Pittsburgh is essentially forbidden to follow the leader it has elected, because it’s at odds with TEC’s “majority” position”
Anyone can leave, thousands do every day!
What they can’t do is take the family silver with them.
If it’s simply a matter of vows and canons — nothing more, as you imply — then the presiding bishop has a problem on her hands. She failed to secure the commitment of the three senior bishops to inhibit Duncan, which is a necessary step in the process. She failed to notify Duncan himself of the charges against him until the inhibition process has failed — how is that in keeping with the rules? She notified the HOB five days before the vote that last week’s meeting would not only be to discuss events at Lambeth, but also to vote… Read more »
“One of the real problems of the present claims by the dissident asserters is that they are in some way more ‘orthodox’ than those who have chosen to remain part of the Body of Christ in TEC.” Which is laughable when you think that they have abandoned the traditional definitions of ‘orthodoxy’, that being mostly Evangelical, their tradition goes back no further than the Reformation, and that in the Jerusalem statement signed recently, they could not affirm three of the Seven Ecumenical Councils, the Christological statements of which have always been the definers of ‘orthodoxy’. How they can call radical… Read more »
Thanks Pat ON, right on target. Whether I agree or not with Southern Cone Bishop Duncan, or probably have a mixed approach to what he preaches, that was not the cause of his sustained deposition. His violation of his ordination vows, along with sometimes silly and sometimes slightly sly efforts to fool and confuse us about what he was really doing in his attempts to steal assets that belong to all of us in trust together, is the key smoking gun canonical deposition point. A theological and ethical point, too, since it is a very odd conservatism or self-proclaimed orthodoxy… Read more »
Lionel:
Thanks for your response. I got a couple of others that seemed to be reacting to someone else’s post rather than mine. Your post doesn’t give any type of detailed analysis, but it is certainly deeper than anything else received.
Steve
“Anyone can leave, thousands do every day! What they can’t do is take the family silver with them.” Sure they can, Erika. Want proof? Just take a trip to London and visit Westminster Abbey, or go to Canterbury and visit the cathedral, or go to Edinburgh and have a look at St. Giles, or go to…well, you get the point. The one thing we really have to be grateful for is that the ones who don’t get the silver still get to walk away with their head firmly attached to their necks! Listen, we Christians have a long history of… Read more »
“She (The Primate of TEC, Bishop Katherine) has interpreted Scripture, the canons, and the future of the church in her own way.” – K, on wednesday And, by the same token, has not the deposed ex Bishop Duncan done precisely the same, – i.e. – Interpreted Scripture, the canons, and the future of the Church, in his own way? Only, in his case; with less guidance, authority and wisdom? Speaking of his schismatic actions; one might say that these are hardly in accord with either the orthodoxy or orthopraxy that Duncan and his mentor Bishop Venables arrogate to themselves. Outright… Read more »
Joe I’m not saying that people haven’t been taking the family silver with them, but it hasn’t usually been done with the blessing of those they stole from. The ruins of Glastonbury Abbey are a powerful reminder of what happens. I’m not even saying that +Duncan was necessarily wrong (although I personally believe he was). What I’m saying is that it is completely naive to expect TEC not to respond. You know, it’s almost funny how evangelicals are absolutely fanatical about the law when it concerns the sex lives of other people, but believe that it should absolutely not apply… Read more »
“it’s almost funny how evangelicals are absolutely fanatical about the law when it concerns the sex lives of other people, but believe that it should absolutely not apply to them when it’s about something they disagree with.”
Actually, Erika, in the right setting, it’s absolutely hilarious.
Sure, we conservatives have our hypocrisy. No denying it. But come now, you have to admit that TEC has been playing fast and loose with the canons as well. The whole bit about “eligible” to vote vs. “present” is played one way when a bishop is about to be deposed (without trial!) but the exact opposite point is made BY THE SAME PEOPLE when they are arguing about votes taken at Virginia churches (see http://accurmudgeon.blogspot.com/2008/09/hypocrisy-thy-name-is-david-booth-beers.html ). What do you call that? My point is this: We should be able to come to some sort of compromise. Depending on the local… Read more »
“. . . Furthermore, the Congregations did not simply schedule a congregational meeting at which a vote of those present could be taken. Instead, they went to great lengths to ensure a majority vote of all those who . . . were eligible to vote . . . .” I leave it to others more informed on this than me to comment overall, I’d just like to point out that this in reference to CANA is a bit much. We are talking about the Virginia schismatics, after all, and if I remember correctly, a significant number of those “eligible to… Read more »
“If only we had a leader who had the internal fortitude and the moral authority to bring this to a close…” – Joe.
You already have one, Joe, and she has accomplished what you seem to require of her. What’s the beef now?
Pierre Whaol and others have made the point that, given the nature and facts of the presentment against him, there was no canonical means to establish a “trial” per se. Strictly speaking, the action was not a deposition (ie, expelling him from a place of authority in the Episcopal Church), but rather a finding that he had abandoned the communion of that Church. In other words, they didn’t toss him. Rather, he tossed himself and they acknowledged that he had done so. A bit of hair-splitting, no doubt – rather like the traditional Anglican apologia that the setting aside of… Read more »
“. . . Furthermore, the Congregations did not simply schedule a congregational meeting at which a vote of those present could be taken. Instead, they went to great lengths to ensure a majority vote of all those who . . . were eligible to vote . . . .” This may be true in some cases. In the case of Grace and St. Stephen’s it manifestly is not. To be admitted to the meeting, one was required to accept what amounted to a loyalty oath to the schismatic position. In other words, if you weren’t going to vote the way… Read more »
Ford, How would you prove that the “eligible were restricted to honest to God confirmed Anglicans who were interested in staying Anglicans and not becoming Baptists in all but name”? There are Episcopalians born and raised in the church on both sides of the issues. Born and raised Episcopalians who think that the leaders of TEC are a bunch of heretics now, and born and raised Episcopalians who want TEC to be more progressive. Who decides who is or is not a “real Anglican/Episcopalian”? As the local rector once admitted, “We don’t raise Episcopalians anymore and we don’t do regular… Read more »
Chris H:
I think the issue here is that many of the people who voted in those Virginia parishes were NOT confirmed or received into the Episcopal Church. They were regular congregants and contributors to those parishes, but they had never actually become Episcopalians through confirmation or reception.
“Who decides who is or is not a “real Anglican/Episcopalian”?” Well, I think that regardless how long I had been attending a Baptist church, and regardless of whether or not the congregation counted me one of them, I would not be able to vote in their congregational decision making processes without have formally joined the Baptist Church. I’d think myself dishonest, otherwise. That would mean also gaining an understanding of and assenting to Baptist ecclesiology and doctrine. We have had reported here by several people that many members of the schismatic Virginia parishes have done none of these things, and… Read more »
Erika, One could also turn that around to, “”it’s almost funny how liberals are absolutely fanatical about the law when it concerns the buildings they never paid for or touched, but believe that it should absolutely not apply to them when it’s about something they disagree with.” Does that apply to the irregular ordinations of women priests before the canons were changed, or communion without baptism, or the other liberal practices that go against the canons, or do they just apply to conservatives? Liberals seem as good at ignoring canons they don’t like as conservatives are. Ford, Thank you for… Read more »
“I assumed there was some sort of parallel in TEC, being so much more formal/hierarchical than mine.” So, not being an Anglican, why do you say: “One could also turn that around to, “”it’s almost funny how liberals are absolutely fanatical about the law when it concerns the buildings they never paid for or touched, but believe that it should absolutely not apply to them when it’s about something they disagree with.”” which presumably refers to TEC? You don’t know why the schismatics oughtn’t take the buildings? Fine. You aren’t Anglican, presumably your tradition does not have a catholic ecclesiology.… Read more »
Chris H:
The rules for voting in parish elections/decisions vary by parish, as far as I can tell. Some require confirmation or reception, others do not. Most DO require some clear indication of membership in the parish, such as regular contributions.
“Does that apply to the irregular ordinations of women priests before the canons were changed, or communion without baptism”.
I don’t know enough about the canons to judge these statements, can anyone help?
“Does that apply to the irregular ordinations of women priests ……ignoring canons they don’t like as conservatives are.” This “liberal” doesn’t like the idea of going outside the canons, I don’t buy the rather romantic “Ho for the war!” attitude that claims that if “we” don’t do this, then nothing’ll ever change. Same applies to the consercation of Gene Robinson, actually, though that does not make the actions of the Right in any way Christian, let alone justified. Communion before baptism? Where? Is there some epidemic of non-Christians unworthily receiving the sacrament? How many unbaptised present themselves at an altar… Read more »