Episcopal Café has this:
Lee also did not consent to Duncan inhibition
Bishop Peter Lee, the bishop of the Diocese of Virginia has released the following statement in response to questions about whether or not he agreed to consent to acting to inhibit Bishop Robert Duncan of the Diocese of Pittsburgh who has been charged with the abandonment of the Communion of the Episcopal Church:
I along with the two other most senior active bishops in the House of Bishops were asked by Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori to review the evidence and give consent to moving forward with the inhibitions of the Rt. Rev. Robert Duncan, Bishop of Pittsburgh and the Rt. Rev. John-David Schofield, Bishop of San Joaquin on the charge of abandonment of the communion of this Church. I gave my consent for the inhibition of Bishop Schofield. It is clear that by his actions and their result he has abandoned the communion of this Church. I did not give my consent for the inhibition of Bishop Duncan at this time. The Diocese of Pittsburgh, which Bishop Duncan leads, has not formalized any change to their membership within the Episcopal Church. I do not take either of these actions lightly, the giving or withholding of consent to these inhibitions. I fear that Bishop Duncan’s course may be inevitable. But I also believe that it is most prudent to take every precaution and provide every opportunity for Bishop Duncan and the leadership of the Diocese of Pittsburgh to turn back from the course they seem to desire and instead to remain in the Episcopal Church.
The Rt. Rev. Peter James Lee
Bishop of Virginia
See also: Bishop Frade explains and Bishop Wimberly explains.
Wait a minute now. Isn’t +Lee one of the evil Hell bound Liberals who is persecuting the faithful remnant, trying to steal the churches their forebears bought an paid for? I’m sure his refusal to inhibit +Duncan can be turned into some kind of persecution, but, since I can’t for the life of me see how, I am all of a twitter in expectation.
Off topic, but of interest, the bishop of Winchester is slated to be co-consecrator of Mark Lawrence, whose progress towards the episcopacy has been noted on this site, as bishop of South Carolina this coming Saturday.
http://www.dioceseofsc.org/mt/archives/000314.html/
One really gets a strong impression from all three senior bishops with jurisdiction that they each took their consent discernments seriously, and that fair due process for the other three bishops under review was one uppermost factor in mind, though not thank goodness the only factor. Otherwise the whole matter would have been oversimplified. Still. I am currently persuaded by the blog conversations across TA, FatherJakes, Preludium, and above all, Tobias Haller’s blog In A Godward Direction on jintoku. The focus upon diocese and diocesan votes misses its inhibition marks. The better inhibition question focuses, not upon a diocese but… Read more »
Most disappointing . . most disappointing indeed. Everyone agrees that we’re past “READY” and “AIM”, all that is left is “FIRE”. To inhibit Bp D would work against more violence to our Church. Instead, these two would wait for the ultimate violence to be delivered and only after the fact ask that it be stopped. To suggest that Bp D might change his mind is absurd given all that we know about him. These Senior Bishops are having ‘senior moments.’ These two Sr Bishops should be held accountable for what happens next. They clearly had the opportunity to do what… Read more »
I’m not so sure that +Lee is really that interested in suing for property of the churches, he did seem to want to lean towards amicable settlement. From what I’ve seen he is doing it at the request of the presiding bishop.
“I’m not so sure that +Lee is really that interested in suing for property of the churches, he did seem to want to lean towards amicable settlement. From what I’ve seen he is doing it at the request of the presiding bishop.” No. The Diocese os Virginia is responding – let me reiterate that – responding – to the law suits filed by the neo-Africans the morning after their votes to depart. Bp Lee and the Diocese have no need to be prodded to defend that which they hold in trust for TEC. It would be an act of fiduciary… Read more »
Bishop Lee is honorable, fair, hopeful, always.
He was always honorable with Minns+…it was later that the Nigerian Anglican +Minns and the other plotters and schemers poorly used the full length of +Lee’s “generosity of spirit” and are now dangling from it…we will see how well dishonesty survives…I expect the same will be true with the +Duncan except he, unlike +Minns and accomplices, may not have anyplace Anglican left to go/hide and be snide…maybe Bolivia will have an opening…just in the “nick” of time?
i think that bishops lee and wimberley are cowards.
Boliva is the Southern Cone I do believe.
I just wonder if either Wimberely and Lee will help replace what Duncan steals. The Calvary lawsuit might save the diocesan properties and some of the endowments but the ones leaving could leave this diocese in a serious financial crisis.
Yes, it is disappointing the two of the longest serving bishops misunderstand the canon, applying it to dioceses rather than to individuals — did not they consult with their canons to the ordinary (one of banes of canon law is bishops thinking that they can figure it out for themselves — a big problems in the RC church since the revision & the unofficial English translation of the Roman Code).
in response to deacon Jim,
I wish Don and Peter had gone ahead and inhibited Bob. however, they are acting in good faith and a spirit of charity. it’s almost a given that Bob will be deposed at some point by the full house. if Bob makes a final move out of TEC, they will (if asked) inhibit him – they did with Jon-David. let’s not call them cowards. you couldn’t pay me enough to take Peter’s job, for sure.
PS, Peter = Peter Lee. if I say Pete, I mean Peter “First Black Pope” Akinola.
I find myself agreeing with former insider Dan Martins assessment of these events – it seems horses need to bolt before any action will be taken: “Let’s start with the obvious, and then, perhaps, move on to the subtle. The canonical process that has been put into play amounts to closing the barn door after the horses have escaped. A little more than a month ago, the Diocese of San Joaquin took an action which a rather decisive majority of the clergy and laity assembled in convention believe relieves them, and their Bishop, of any accountability to the constitution and… Read more »
If the Episcopal leadership of TEC – presiding bishop, the 3 senior bishops, the house of bishops, etc. believes that dioceses and bishops cannot ‘take their diocese out of the Episcopal Church’ then there is no reason to worry about whether the diocesan convention has made any particular vote. Rather, having taken the vote and having the bishop support the vote is very good evidence of abandonment of the discipline of the church, even though that vote is null and void. Note that the canon calls for ‘defrocking’ if clergy depart from the doctrine OR the discipline OR the worship… Read more »
“I’m not so sure that +Lee is really that interested in suing for property of the churches, he did seem to want to lean towards amicable settlement. From what I’ve seen he is doing it at the request of the presiding bishop.” My point was that he is seen as being one of the heathen host that has taken over TEC and is systematically destroying Christianity. The Right keeps trying to convince us of this dire threat to God’s truth after all. There is no such conspiracy of course, but fear is such a great motivator. There is a small… Read more »