WR ECUSA: more press reactions
Further Update Sunday
The BBC Sunday programme has 4 minutes of radio interview with Mark Pinsky discussing the HoB meeting this week.
Listen here with Real Audio.
Update
The Associated Press has a further story quoting Bishop Robert Duncan Episcopal bishop says letter lacks remorse over same-sex clergy:
One of the leaders of conservative Episcopal clergy said that a signed statement of “sincere regret” by U.S. bishops fell short of what was needed to heal a rift in the church over the consecration of a gay bishop.
“It certainly didn’t go far enough, but it was a move in the right direction,” said Bishop Robert Duncan of Pittsburgh.
The Daily Telegraph has a report on ECUSA by Jonathan Petre US bishops refuse to back down on gays
(it’s not clear whether this made the paper edition, as this squib version also exists).
Kevin Eckstrom’s report for Religion News Service appears in a somewhat longer form in the Winston-Salem Journal The Great Divide
National Public Radio had this report Episcopal Bishops Won’t Halt Gay Ordination This includes the following quote from Bishop Robert Duncan:
“This is really all about the rest of the world dealing with the American Church. And, the rest of the world, at this point, receives what it is we said today. The words we spoke were … they sounded right. Whether the action would follow out of those words is what remains to be seen.”
PBS (the American public TV network) had a news feature Episcopal Bishops’ Meeting in Utah. This report concludes with the following:
One sign of efforts to prevent gay ordination and same-sex marriages from splitting the Episcopal Church was the announcement that the two priests leading the campaigns for equal rights for gays and lesbians have been invited by the Archbishop of Canterbury to come to London for consultations.
Update This is now confirmed by the following press release (original only in PDF format)
0 Comments15 January 2005
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASEINTEGRITY INVITED TO LONDON FOR CONVERSATION
Integrity is pleased to have been invited by the Revd. Canon Gregory K. Cameron, Deputy Secretary General of the Anglican Communion Office, to London for a conversation on practical ways in which a Communion-wide dialog on human sexuality might be moved forward. The meeting will take place in early February. Integrity will be represented by its president, the Rev. Susan Russell, and its immediate past president, the Rev. Michael W. Hopkins. We understand that several other Anglican LGBT groups have also been invited to participate.
No detailed agenda for the meeting has been enunciated and Integrity has no preconceived notions about its outcomes. Nevertheless, we are deeply appreciative of the opportunity to engage in this conversation and are hopeful that constructive, concrete next steps will emerge.
The Windsor Report rightly reminds us all that “Lambeth Resolution 1.10 calls for an ongoing process of listening and discernment, and that Christians of good will need to be prepared to engage honestly and frankly with each other on issues relating to human sexuality. It is vital that the Communion establish processes and structures to facilitate ongoing discussion” (¶146). Integrity has continuously called for such dialogs during the past three decades of its ministry and we stand ready to help make them a reality.
(The Reverend) Susan Russell, President
president@integrityusa.org
714-356-5718 (mobile)
626-583-2740 (office)
Doug Ball, Executive Secretary
info@integrityusa.org
800-462-9498
DEPO: an example
This report from the Diocese of Massachusetts is very encouraging and suggests that the proposed arrangements in the Episcopal Church USA for extended oversight can be made to work but require goodwill on both sides.
Boston Globe Episcopalians compromise to avoid split
Another longstanding example, also in New England, mentioned briefly in the above article, was featured in the Church Times last November. A theology of rubbing along
Other examples, anyone?
1 CommentWR: the exact responses
This note compares what the Windsor Report requested with what the ECUSA House of Bishops said.
WR wording in italics.
HOB wording in bold.
My comments in roman.
Numbering of points as in earlier posting (some points listed there do not require a corporate ECUSA response).
1. To ECUSA as a corporate body:
…the Episcopal Church (USA) be invited to express its regret that the proper constraints of the bonds of affection were breached in the events surrounding the election and consecration of a bishop for the See of New Hampshire, and for the consequences which followed, and that such an expression of regret would represent the desire of the Episcopal Church (USA) to remain within the Communion.
In this spirit of intentional practice, we affirm that all need to repent, as the Archbishop of Canterbury reminded us in his Advent Letter 2004. We repent of the ways we as bishops have sometimes treated each other, failing to honor Christ’s presence in one another. Furthermore, too often we have also failed to recognize Christ’s presence fully manifest in our sister and brother Anglicans around the global communion. We honor their full voice and wisdom. We desire mutuality. We recognize our interdependence in the Body of Christ.
Moreover, we as the House of Bishops express our sincere regret for the pain, the hurt, and the damage caused to our Anglican bonds of affection by certain actions of our church. Knowing that our actions have contributed to the current strains in our Communion, we express this regret as a sign of our deep desire for and commitment to continuation of our partnership in the Anglican Communion.
This response appears to fulfill precisely this particular WR request. As I said previously, constitutionally speaking, only General Convention is able to represent ECUSA in making (or not making) this response and although the House of Bishops meeting this week can give a lead, it cannot answer formally for ECUSA as a whole, just as the English HoB cannot speak for the General Synod of the Church of England. So:
12 CommentsWe note here that our decision-making structures differ from those in many parts of the Anglican Communion and that our actions require conciliar involvement by all the baptized of our church, lay and ordained. Therefore we as bishops, in offering our regrets, do not intend to preempt the canonical authority of the General Convention of the Episcopal Church. At the same time, we are keenly aware of our particular responsibility for episcopal leadership.
press reports on ECUSA bishops
So far, this is heavily dependent on the wire service reports recorded here last night.
Here again is Rachel Zoll’s initial report for Associated Press
Episcopal Bishops Regret Gay-Bishop Angst
which also appeared in the Minneapolis Star Tribune as U.S. Episcopal bishops regret consecrating gay bishop
and in the Boston Globe, in shortened form, as Episcopal bishops ask Anglicans to forgive a slight
while the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review ran it with some local additions as Episcopalian bishops express ‘regret’. In the Salt Lake Tribune it ran as Episcopal bishops ‘regret’ gay ordination furor and in the Chicago Sun-Times as Episcopal leaders: We’re sorry gay bishop caused tension
Here again is Reuters first report:
U.S. Anglicans, Lutherans Struggle with Gay Issues
The Reuters story was repeated elsewhere with various headlines, for example:
Washington Post Churches Take Steps on Issue Of Marriage Between Gays
Other reports:
From the Deseret News in Salt Lake City, Episcopal bishops apologize for ‘pain’ over gay ordination
The New York Times mentions it towards the end of Lutherans Recommend Tolerance on Gay Policy (The NYT website also carries the AP report)
Washington Times Episcopal bishops ‘regret,’ dissent over gay issues
Newark Star-Ledger U.S. bishops apologize for electing gay prelate
This is by Kevin Eckstrom of Religion News Service
ECUSA bishops: additional response to Windsor Report
A group of 21 ECUSA bishops, so far, have signed a statement
Group of Bishops Issue “A Statement of Acceptance of and Submission to the Windsor Report 2004”
which is also reproduced in full below. [original link no longer working]
ECUSA HoB Letter on Windsor Report
The House of Bishops of ECUSA has issued this Letter
A Word to the Church – From the House of Bishops of the Episcopal Church
The full text is also given below.
Here is Rachel Zoll’s report for Associated Press
Episcopal Bishops Regret Gay-Bishop Angst
Here is Reuters first report:
U.S. Anglicans, Lutherans Struggle with Gay Issues
Windsor Report: ECUSA bishops meet
The House of Bishops of the Episcopal Church meets for two days next week, in Salt Lake City Utah, for the sole purpose of considering the Windsor Report. The arrangements for this meeting are described here: Frank Griswold Writes the Episcopal Church Bishops about the Upcoming House of Bishops Meeting in Utah in January. You can follow these links to find out more about the Public Conversations Project, consultants Laura Chasin and Robert Stains, and their previous related work.
The local newspaper, the Deseret Morning News has this advance report Episcopalians plan Salt Lake session to take on same-sex furor.
Associated Press has issued Episcopal Bishops to Discuss Gay Ordination Issue in Salt Lake (copy via the Casper Wyoming Star)
The local diocese has Wrestling With Windsor.
The Bishop of Central Florida has written this letter to his colleagues. (His earlier comments on the WR can be found here.) In reads in part:
…In all honesty, I confess that an unclear or ambiguous response would be a pastoral disaster for me and I believe, for many others in our beloved Church. Even worse would be for us to create the perception that we are dodging the Report altogether or trying to “buy time” by employing delaying tactics.
I write in charity to request your support when I rise to ask that the House consider addressing those specific portions of the Report that are directed to us as Bishops of ECUSA. The Windsor Report is lengthy and complex and I realize we cannot address those sections of the Report that require action of the entire Church. I believe we need to focus on, and begin to shape our response to, the recommendations of the Windsor Report that call upon us as Bishops to:
- Express our regret (as defined by the Archbishop of Canterbury in his Advent Letter to the Primates) for having so damaged the Communion.
- Demonstrate our desire to continue to “walk together” with the rest of the Communion.
- Agree to a moratorium on same sex-blessings and the consecration of non-celibate homosexual persons until or unless a “new consensus” emerges in the Communion that such actions are seen as legitimate in the light of Scripture and Christian tradition.
- Ask those among us who believe such actions are legitimate to “make their case” to the rest of the Communion.
- And Ask those of us who participated in the consecration of the Bishop of New Hampshire to refrain from representing the Anglican Communion in international and ecumenical gatherings following the example of our Primate who resigned from leadership in the ARCIC work.
I know not all of us will be in agreement with all of the recommendations in the Report. But I am certain we need to focus on the recommendations themselves rather than debating how well sections C and D flow from sections A and B…
The weekly magazine The Living Church has just (issue dated 9 January) published this editorial: More Needed from Bishops.
…Business as usual for the bishops would involve issuing a pastoral letter following adjournment of the meeting which states that the bishops receive thankfully the Windsor Report and commend the theologians who worked so diligently on it. The letter would contain an announcement that says the bishops have met amid prayer and Bible study and have reflected upon the Windsor Report and that they are pleased to commend it to the 75th General Convention in 2006 for further study and response.
At this time, the Episcopal Church needs more than that from its bishops. The foundations of the Church are crumbling and the bishops need to provide what the Church needs most — leadership and direction. A recommendation by the House of Bishops could be the foundation upon which the next General Convention will build legislation. It would indicate to the Anglican primates, who gather in Northern Ireland next month, whether the American Church is likely to take the recommendations of the Windsor Report seriously. By now members of the House of Bishops have had a chance to digest the Windsor Report. Most of them have issued public statements about it. Many of them have participated in discussions about the report with other bishops at the provincial level. By now they ought to have formed concrete opinions. A clear communication to the Church is in order…
Addition
This column in Episcopal Life by Doug LeBlanc is also pertinent: Please forgive me
Rowan Williams’ Pastoral Letter to which Doug refers can be found here.
ECUSA attitudes analysed
The Christian Century magazine published an article last August, written by Bill Sachs of the Episcopal Church Foundation entitled The Episcopal middle: listening to congregations and subsequent correspondence was published in November under the heading Episcopal decisions …
The article makes clear that the situation is not a simple one:
SOON AFTER the Episcopal Church’s General Convention of 2003, an unanticipated phenomenon became apparent. Though lay leaders and clergy frequently described themselves as dissatisfied with the convention, they were unwilling to align themselves with either supporters or opponents of its most controversial actions — electing Gene Robinson, an openly gay man, as bishop of New Hampshire, and allowing the blessing of same-sex unions. More often than not, it was difficult to elicit whole-hearted dissent or support.
Leaders contacted by the Episcopal Church Foundation often depicted their dioceses and congregations as defined by a “20-20-60” breakdown: 20 percent endorsed the convention’s actions, 20 percent were against them, and 60 percent came down “somewhere else.” As one prominent lay leader expressed it, “I’m not drawn to either extreme and I don’t know where to turn.”
…the majority of Episcopalians are neither totally for nor against the actions of the church’s national body. They view the General Convention’s decisions as compelling a position on a complex issue before the church at the grassroots was ready to take a position.
And in the follow-up, Sachs summarises as follows:
12 Comments…My point was that the convention’s actions do not reflect the outlook of the majority of people in the pews of Episcopal churches, as the Episcopal Church Foundation’s national survey and a variety of interviews and conversations have revealed. Members of local churches consistently describe the priorities of the convention, and the priorities of their congregations, as being distinctly different. Hence the foundation concluded that somewhat more than 60 percent of all members of Episcopal churches neither fully endorse, nor fully dispute, the convention’s decisions. Local leaders and even some bishops have stated to the foundation that the church was ill prepared for the actions the convention took. Thus a majority of Episcopalians report that they view the convention from afar and view its actions as imposing conclusions they are unprepared to endorse.
Rosemont reported in England
The Church of England Newspaper reported the Rosemont story this way: American traditionalist takes rival consecration
The report includes the following comments from others:
“Fr Moyer’s deposition by the Bishop of Pennsylvania accused him of ‘abandoning the communion of this church’,” Bishop Jack Iker of Fort Worth, a leading Forward in Faith bishop, told The Church of England Newspaper. “He had not done that; but now, if he is consecrated, he will have removed himself from the Anglican Communion,” said Bishop Iker, who also asked Dr Moyer to resign as president of FiF (North America).
Bishop Robert Duncan of Pittsburgh counselled Dr Moyer not to accept the post and later released a statement distancing the Anglican Communion Network from the announcement. “I regret that his decision raises difficulties in his relationship to the broader Anglican Communion,” he stated on Dec 20, noting that Dr Moyer had resigned as FiF’s representative to the Network.
Lambeth Palace spokesman, the Rev Jonathan Jennings, released a statement confirming that Dr Moyer had discussed the matter with Dr. Williams but that “the Archbishop was not asked for his blessing on the proposal; he expressed himself in terms of pastoral support to Fr Moyer during what will be a transitional phase from one form of ministry to another.”
“Dr Williams was clear with him, however, that this development would pose serious canonical obstacles to the prospect of Fr Moyer exercising a priestly ministry within the Anglican Communion and advised Fr Moyer to discuss the matter fully with his Ordinary as part of the process of discernment,” wrote Mr Jennings.
The Church Times in its News columns this week (not on the web yet) carries only a short notice of the bare facts, but does remind its readers of what happened in 2002: Carey and Williams back leader unfrocked by US bishop is how the Church Times reported it then.
Meanwhile, although Dr Moyer is no longer the Dean of the FiFNA Convocation within the NACDAP, he remains the President of FiFNA, and as such issued this Message from the FiF North America President.
update a further comment on 20 December from Fr Cantrell.
1 Commentmore Rosemont reaction
The Network of Anglican Communion Dioceses and Parishes has issued a press release. It is not yet on their own website, so the full text is below.
It announces the resignation of David Moyer as dean of the FiF Convocation within the Network.
Update 11.45 pm GMT
This release is now available on the Network website:
The Anglican Communion Network Announces Resignation of Moyer as Dean
Rosemont reactions
Forward in Faith has now posted two items relating to this:
A statement from FiFNA: Fr David Moyer is Elected as a bishop in the Anglican Church in America (the official copy of what was first published at titusonenine). This includes the following:
The date of Fr. Moyer’s consecration, February 16th, was chosen to coincide with a previously-scheduled international meeting which will bring the bishops who will consecrate him into the Philadelphia area. Some concern has been expressed that it will come just before the meeting in Ireland at which the Primates of the Anglican Communion will respond to the Windsor Report. Fr. Moyer has assured FIF/NA that this timing is simply a matter of coincidence: it is not meant to sent any message to the Primates, and FIF/NA hopes that Fr. Moyer’s election and consecration will have no impact on their deliberations.
While his consecration in the ACA will not affect his constitutional standing within FIF/NA, the Council and Fr. Moyer are considering whether or not he will continue as its President.
A statement from Fr Geoffrey Kirk of FiF UK: FiF UK reacts to Fr Moyer’s Election . This reads:
Forward in Faith UK has learned with interest of the proposed consecration of Fr David Moyer, currently President of Forward in Faith North America, as a bishop in the Traditional Anglican Communion. We trust that Fr Moyer will be able to use his new role in the Anglican Church of America to assist those in the Episcopal Church who have been disenfranchised by the ordination of women as priests and bishops. We regret however that those responsible did not see fit to consult the bishops of Forward in Faith around the world before reaching their decision.
Meanwhile the Philadelphia Enquirer had this report for its readers this morning: Embattled Episcopal rector joins Anglican denomination. This headline reflects the confusion!
Update And the Associated Press via the Centre Daily Times reported it as Defrocked Episcopal minister moves to Anglican church post
which is equally likely to upset all concerned.
Rosemont in Wonderland
Los Angeles is not the only diocese of ECUSA that has experienced the intervention of African bishops. In 2002, there was an intervention in the Diocese of Pennsylvania at The Church of the Good Shepherd, Rosemont (whose parish website appears to be inactive). A full archive of documents relating to that intervention can be found at Forward in Faith. The upshot of it all was that David Moyer was:
- deposed from the ministry of the Episcopal Church by Bishop Charles Bennison of Pennsylvania (his name does not appear in the ECUSA directory of clergy)
- accepted as a priest in the Diocese of the Upper Shire in Malawi, in the Province of Central Africa by Archbishop Bernard Malango (who is also bishop of that diocese, and
- supported at the time by the then Archbishop of Canterbury, George Carey and the then Archbishop of Wales, Rowan Williams, see correspondence here and also here, not to mention here.
Nevertheless, Dr Moyer, who is president of Forward in Faith North America has remained in office as Rector of the ECUSA parish for two years without further legal action by the diocese being taken against him or the vestry of that parish.
This seems unlikely to continue. This weekend, it was announced that:
The Rev. David Moyer, rector of the Episcopal Church of the Good Shepherd in Rosemont, Pa., has been elected a bishop in the Anglican Church in America (ACA), a breakaway Episcopal group including 8,000 U.S. members and 500,000 members worldwide.
Mr. Moyer will be consecrated Feb. 16 at Good Shepherd by three bishops of the ACA. He said he will continue pastoring the church as well as overseeing ACA military chaplaincies.
The priest is currently serving under the auspices of the Anglican Province of Central Africa. Archbishop Louis Falk, head of the ACA, said Mr. Moyer has the permission of Central African Archbishop Bernard Malango to remain at Good Shepherd. The actual election, he said, occurred in late November, but the result was only announced yesterday.
The official news release about this is here:
The Rev. Dr. David L. Moyer Elected Bishop by the Anglican Church in America and a detailed news report is here:
MOYER TO BE CONSECRATED BISHOP Timing Gets Mixed Reactions Among Conservative Leaders
titusonenine has published A Statement from the Executive Committee of Forward in Faith, North America regarding the election of Fr. David Moyer as a bishop in the Anglican Church in America although at this writing nothing has appeared on the FiF website itself [FiF site now updated] although other comments from FiF members appear here and here and here.
This development is bound to be of concern to other American conservatives outside FiFNA, because FiFNA is a major constituent member of the Network of Anglican Communion Dioceses and Parishes.
The Anglican Church in America is itself a constituent part of The Traditional Anglican Communion. This body is active in various parts of the world but in particular with FiF in Australia, where as mentioned in the Christian Challenge story linked above, reports suggest that another consecration by the TAC archbishop John Hepworth, of an Australian FiF leader, David Chislett, is likely soon.
Despite these close links with FiF, ACA was not a party to the agreement announced last July between NACDAP and other groups.
15 CommentsLos Angeles: Orombi's reply to Bruno
Uganda is a long way from Los Angeles, but yet was close enough to Pittsburgh for Archbishop Henry Orombi to have been a guest at their diocesan convention on 5/6 November, see picture here.
The full text of Archbishop Orombi’s reply to Bishop Bruno’s letter, dated 3 November, inviting him to come to a meeting in Los Angeles, has now been published. You can read that reply here. The original report about Bishop Bruno’s invitation is here.
The letter from Orombi concludes:
Our churches in Los Angeles came to us like children who were running away from home, and we have offered them a safe place to be. So for us, the first question that must be asked is Why are they running away? We didn’t look for them or hunt for them. We are responding to a need. And, we will continue to respond to a need until the local problem is resolved; we will not relinquish them into a spiritually dangerous situation. Therefore, we see no need for a meeting until you and the Diocese of Los Angeles have repented of your participation in and promotion of unbiblical behavior and teaching.
What the Windsor Report said was (my emphasis added):
150. In these circumstances we call upon the church or province in question to recognise first that dissenting groups in their midst are, like themselves, seeking to be faithful members of the Anglican family; and second, we call upon all the bishops concerned, both the ‘home’ bishops and the ‘intervening’ bishops as Christian leaders and pastors to work tirelessly to rebuild the trust which has been lost.
and also:
11 Comments155. We call upon those bishops who believe it is their conscientious duty to intervene in provinces, dioceses and parishes other than their own:
* to express regret for the consequences of their actions
* to affirm their desire to remain in the Communion, and
* to effect a moratorium on any further interventions.We also call upon these archbishops and bishops to seek an accommodation with the bishops of the dioceses whose parishes they have taken into their own care.
Pittsburgh lawsuit: the diocese responds
A page of “Frequently Asked Questions” has been posted on the website of the Diocese of Pittsburgh.
The FAQ confirms that Bishop Duncan and his Standing Committee are serious about the threat of expulsion of two parishes from his diocese:
7. Are the Bishop and Standing Committee serious about invoking Canon XV, Section 6 dissolution?
Yes. The notice was recommended reluctantly and the strong preference of the Bishop and the Standing Committee is that it will not be necessary to pursue dissolution. Diocesan leaders intend to do their part to achieve reconciliation. Nevertheless, the Standing Committee would not have recommended this course if the diocesan leadership was not prepared to follow through if necessary.
The whole idea that a diocese can simply expel a parish with whom it is in dispute is extremely difficult to understand.
The FAQ is also interesting for the interpretation it puts on the Dennis Canon, described as “controversial”:
3. What is the Dennis Canon?
The essence of the “Dennis Canon” (Title 1, Canon 7, Section 4 of ECUSA’s canons) is this statement: “All real and personal property held by or for the benefit of any Parish, Mission or Congregation is held in trust for this Church and the Diocese thereof in which such Parish, Mission or Congregation is located.”
Those that brought this lawsuit claim that by virtue of this canon, controversial since its adoption in 1979, ECUSA has a trust interest (constructive or express) in all parish real estate and assets irrespective of how the title is held or the source of the funds used to acquire the property.
This is the same Canon which is discussed in some detail in this email exchange (pdf file) between Robert Devlin, and Michael Woodruff in the documents filed earlier.
2 CommentsLos Angeles reacts to Windsor report
Los Angeles is a long way from Pittsburgh.
Larry Stammer of the Los Angeles Times reports that Bishop Jon Bruno has said he will observe a personal moratorium on blessing same-sex unions. However, he said his priests were free to continue officiating at homosexual ceremonies. He also wants to seek reconciliation with dissenting parishes.
Episcopal Bishop to Stop Blessing Same-Sex Unions
(There’s also an Associated Press version of the same story here Bishop wants parishes back)
At the same time, the Rt. Rev. J. Jon Bruno, bishop of the six-county Los Angeles diocese, called for an international church summit in Los Angeles, including dissenting African bishops who have claimed jurisdiction over the three parishes.
Bruno said he wanted to seek an accommodation in the controversy that erupted in August when the three parishes unilaterally declared that they had left the diocese and the U.S. Episcopal Church over differences involving Scripture and homosexuality. They said they had placed themselves under the jurisdiction of the Anglican Church in Uganda.
But only hours after Bruno disclosed his moratorium and summit proposals Tuesday, they were rejected by Archbishop Henry Luke Orombi, primate of the Anglican Church in Uganda, and Bishop Evans Kisekka of the Diocese of Luweero in Uganda. The Episcopal Church is the U.S. wing of the worldwide Anglican Communion.
The diocesan website also carries this report of local responses to the actions of the three dissenting parishes:
Grassroots support grows as bishop calls for inclusion which also contains the following statistics on how the three parishes held votes on whether to stay in ECUSA:
According to statements by the three rectors, each congregation held a meeting to vote on the question of remaining within the Episcopal Church or joining the Diocese of Luwero. Of the 1,218 members of St. James’ Church, 292 attended the meeting. Of those attending, 280 voted in favor of the motion; 12 were opposed. At All Saints, 141 of 429 parishioners voted, 131 in favor of secession. At St. David’s, the vote was 68 to 12, out of 125 members (membership numbers are taken from the “communicant in good standing” statistics published in the 2003 Journal of Convention, and include children).
The LA Times also says:
Bruno also sent word of his positions to Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams, the spiritual leader of the worldwide Anglican Communion. Williams, who had written the Los Angeles bishop Nov. 9, called Bruno’s proposal a “generous response” to bring about reconciliation.
Meanwhile, Bruno said Tuesday he would indefinitely delay filing church charges against a retired Episcopal bishop in Texas, the Rt. Rev. Maurice M. Benitez, who is standing in for the African bishops in overseeing the three breakaway parishes. But Bruno is proceeding with the civil lawsuits seeking to regain control over the parishes.
Bruno also disclosed Tuesday that he had authorized another bishop to provide pastoral — but not legal — oversight of Christ the King Church in Santa Barbara, which has also objected to the stands that Bruno and the national church have taken on homosexuality. That church has not seceded and remains under Bruno’s authority.
Addition
Another recent report from the Long Beach Press-Telegram
Church shift protested
25 object to what they say are anti-gay practices at All Saints, which left local diocese.
Pittsburgh: Calvary responds to Duncan
Calvary Episcopal Church has responded to the remarks made by Bishop Duncan with this press release:
…Bishop Duncan has now asserted at the Diocesan Convention that this lawsuit (which seeks to enforce the constitution and canons of the National Church and the Pittsburgh Diocese) could be a basis for expelling Calvary and St. Stephen’s from the Diocese. That assertion has no support in the Diocesan canon providing for dissolution of relationships with parishes, and we are fully confident that such expulsion would never be upheld by either the National Church or the Court. Actually, the Bishop’s very assertion shows the legitimacy of Calvary’s and St. Stephen’s concern that the constitution and canons of the National Church will not be respected in this Diocese…
Canon XV, Sec. 6, Canons of the Diocese of Pittsburgh
“The Convention may, by a two-thirds vote, dissolve its union with any Parish. Provided, however, that . . . notice of said propo sed action shall have be en given in the preceding Annual Convention.”
Below the fold, is a long article by the Rector of Calvary, Harold Lewis published in the current issue of the parish magazine Agape available as a PDF file on the parish site.
3 CommentsPittsburgh diocesan lawsuit
There has been a interesting development in the lawsuit to which Robert Duncan took such exception recently. The official court website has published the most recently filed papers. Unfortunately they are in the format of a 3 Mb PDF file. If you have broadband, you can read the whole thing for yourself here.
It contains as attachments a number of documents written by NACDAP people. Andrew Grimmke at CESLD has kindly extracted several of these into smaller files, which anyone should be able to read with Adobe Acrobat Reader. For full details of all of these go here.
First, here is an exchange of emails between Bob Duncan the bishop and Hugo Blankenship the lawyer concerning the latter’s discussions in England in December 2003 with John Rees who was the legal adviser to the Lambeth Commission.
Second, Mainstream Meeting 11/20/03 appears to be notes from the meeting in London referenced in this AAC press release dated 17 December, which said:
The Network was initially established at a gathering of mainstream Anglican leaders in London on November 20, 2003. The leaders included several bishops, including four Anglican Primates and Bishops Edward L. Salmon of the Diocese of South Carolina, James B. Stanton of the Diocese of Dallas, Jack L. Iker of the Diocese of Ft. Worth, and Robert W. Duncan of the Diocese of Pittsburgh. At the meeting, the U.S. bishops drafted a Memorandum of Agreement that outlines the process for establishing the Network. In keeping with the Preamble to the Constitution of ECUSA, the Memorandum of Agreement pledges to “uphold and propagate the historic faith and order, fulfilling the Church’s apostolic mission”.
Third, here is a Draft Proposal for Overseas AEO dated 3 March 2004 and authored by Alison Barfoot.
There is more in the original file.
0 CommentsPittsburgh diocesan goings-on
Anglicans Online has reports in its News Centre today of some of these extraordinary events, but here is more detail.
The Diocese of Pittsburgh has issued three press releases:
Constitutional amendment overwhelmingly approved
The amendment gives the diocese the constitutional foundation needed to differ with the national church when the diocesan convention determines the national body’s decisions “to be contrary to the historic faith and order of the one holy catholic and apostolic church.” In those cases, the amended constitution makes clear that “the local determination shall prevail.”
To be approved, the resolution had to be passed by majorities of both clergy and lay delegates. Among clergy, 79 voted in favor, 14 against, and 8 abstained. Lay delegates also passed the constitutional amendment by a lopsided margin, with 124 in favor, 45 against and 3 abstentions.
Churches involved in lawsuit should reconsider, says Bishop
Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh Bishop Robert Duncan asked two parishes of the Diocese, Calvary Episcopal Church in East Liberty and St. Stephen’s Church in Wilkensburg, to reconsider their 13-month-old lawsuit against both bishops and 16 other clergy and lay leaders of the Diocese on November 6.
In order to encourage that process and bring the issues involved to resolution, Bishop Duncan gave notice that the union of those congregations to the diocese might properly be considered the next time the Convention of the diocese meets. Diocesan canons provide that the Convention may dissolve its connection to a parish in cases where there are egregious breeches of church faith or church order. The Bishop said that it was the deepest hope of the Standing Committee that invoking this provision might help everyone understand the gravity of what is at issue, and that there must be some better way than Christians suing one another in court. The bishop stated in making the announcement that he hoped this would actually move forward a process of reconciliation and restoration.
Misinformation in Post-Gazette article damaging to diocesan mission
Unfounded speculation, printed in the November 4 Pittsburgh Post – Gazette under the headline “Episcopal diocese ponders future,” is not only untrue, but damaging to the unity and mission of Pittsburgh Episcopalians, said Bishop Robert Duncan.
Dealing with the last one first, here is the newspaper report:
Episcopal diocese ponders future
Progressive Episcopalians of Pittsburgh issued two press releases, each dealing with one of the other two items:
Pittsburgh Episcopal Diocese Pursues Divisive Course
Bishop Threatens Parishes with Expulsion
and the local newspaper reported on them in these terms:
Episcopalians here defy U.S. church
Local bishop pressures two Episcopal churches
Here is the report from Episcopal News Service
Pittsburgh convention approves nullification of national actions