Several reports of American bishops under fire:
First, in relation to San Joaquin some correspondence has been published on Brad Drell’s blog. Here is a PDF file which contains:
Second, the Living Church has a report that the Presentment Against Bishop of Connecticut Moves Forward. This refers to an action which was last reported on 11 months ago, in August 2005.
Third, there are reports of a complaint against another bishop, this time retired Bishop William J. Cox. See here, and corrections here.
And finally for the record, the Living Church reports on changes to the membership of the Title IV Review Committee. (Title IV of the ECUSA Canons concerns Discipline.)
There is nothing wrong with Bishop William Swing’s letter to his fellow-Bishop of San Joaquin. He is drawing the latter’s attention to the fact that the uncanonical and unilateral actions of the San Joaquin Diocese have placed the property rights of all four California dioceses in jeopardy in the event any incorporated parishes seek to disaffiliate with TEC. In fact, in 1988 Bishop Swing stuck his neck out for Bishop-elect Schofield, supporting his election during the confirmation process when some bishops and standing committees had legitimate reservations about Schofield’s refusal to recognize the ordination of women permitted by General Convention… Read more »
I wonder how the author of the letter reconciles these contradictory statements found therein: “[T]he complaining bishops seek Bishop Schofield’s removal from The Episcopal Church under Canon IV.9 which is meant to safeguard the doctrine and worship of the Church or, in other words, theological and scriptural points of view.” which seems like quite an inaccurate summary when compared with “Canon IV.9 provides for an expedited and closed-door deposition process where a bishop has alledegdly abandoned the communion of the Church. However this unique deposition procedure applies in only three situations: (1) where a bishop openly renounces the Doctrine, Discipline… Read more »
I’m not sure whether this fiasco should be called “The Empire Strikes Back” or “The Four Stooges”.
Canon IV.15 of the Canons of the Episcopal Church clearly defines Discipline as follows: “The Discipline of this Church shall be found in the Constitution, the Canons, and the Rubrics and the Ordinal of the Book of Common Prayer.” Therefore, a statement by any ordained person that he or she has placed personal (or diocesan) judgment over and against that of the Constitution and Canons, by a refusal to make an unqualified accession, is a rejection of “the Discipline of this Church.” It is significant that in his letter of response, the San Joaquin chancellor downplays the matter of “Discipline”… Read more »
Is the Chancellor the Bishop’s personal attorney or the attorney for the Diocese? The interests of the Bishop personally and the Diocese may well conflict, which in most states would prevent the attorney from serving in both roles.
“Is the Chancellor the Bishop’s personal attorney or the attorney for the Diocese?” I can’t find a copy of S.J.’s Constitution and Canons on their web site. The language from the Diocese of Virginia says that the Chancellor of the Diocese “… shall be the legal advisor of the Ecclesiastical Authority of the Diocese, and of the Council of the Diocese, and to the Executive Board of the Diocese.” This person is appointed by the bishop or the standing committee if it is at the time the Ecclesiastical Authority [i.e., the bishop is dead or incapacitated]. This person must be… Read more »
The chancellor in most dioceses is the attorney for the diocese. However, like a corporate attorney, he also provides legal advice and litigation support for the officers of the diocese in their official capacity. Although they are technically “constituents” and not “clients,” the effect is almost indistinguishable so long as the client (the diocese, acting through its official decision-making bodies) considers its interests to be aligned with those of the constituent. If a conflict should emerge, it would be the duty of the chancellor to advise the officer to seek independent representation.