Thinking Anglicans

two bishops deposed

Updated twice

ENS reports House of Bishops consents to deposition of John-David Schofield, William Cox:

The House of Bishops voted March 12 to consent to the deposition from the ordained ministry of the Rt. Rev. John-David Schofield, bishop of the Diocese of San Joaquin, and the Rt. Rev. William Jackson Cox, bishop suffragan of the Diocese of Maryland, resigned.

Members of the House of Bishops are preparing a statement regarding these actions and for release after a March 12 afternoon session…

Here’s the text in the case of Bp Schofield:

RESOLUTION

RESOLVED, that pursuant to Canon IV.9.2 of the Episcopal Church, the House of Bishops hereby consents to the Deposition from the ordained ministry of the Rt. Rev. John-David Schofield, Bishop of the Diocese of San Joaquin.

EXPLANATION: On January 9, 2008, the Title IV Review Committee certified to the Presiding Bishop, pursuant to Canon IV.9.1, that the Rt. Rev. John-David Schofield, Bishop of the Diocese of San Joaquin, has repudiated the Doctrine, Discipline, and Worship of the Episcopal Church and has abandoned the Communion of the Church by, inter alia, departing from the Episcopal Church and purporting to take his Diocese with him into affiliation with the Province of the Southern Cone. In the intervening two months since the Presiding Bishop gave notice to Bishop Schofield of the foregoing certification, Bishop Schofield has failed to submit to the Presiding Bishop sufficient retraction or denial of the actions found by the Title IV Review Committee. Accordingly, the Presiding Bishop has presented the matter to the House of Bishops and requested consent to Bishop Schofield’s Deposition.

Update One

Bishop Schofield responds to the HOB decision

NACDAP: Episcopal House of Bishops Votes to Depose Network Bishops

Update Two

House of Bishops statement on Schofield, Cox

Archbishop Venables Memo to Bishop Schofield

For press coverage, see Episcopal Café Secular media file reports on the actions of the House of Bishops.

56
Leave a Reply

avatar
3000
56 Comment threads
0 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
32 Comment authors
Pat O'NeillGöran Koch-SwahneJoeMalcolm+Lapinbizarre Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest
Notify of
ruidh
Guest
ruidh

Now, what happens with his Lambeth invitation?

JCF
Guest
JCF

[Re Schofield]

Simultaneously: “Lord have mercy” and “Thanks be to God!”

Deacon Charlie Perrin
Guest
Deacon Charlie Perrin

As to Mr. Schofield’s response: The more he says, the more he sound like some character out of Alice and Wonderland.

david wh
Guest
david wh

There was no need for a lot of this mess, if LibTEC had learned from the example of the CofE: Acts of Synod for legitimate dissenters, satisfactory protection and flying Bishops etc.

But LibTEC is demonstrating the meaning of Liberal “Tolerance”. It includes everyone… if they are liberal .

Lou Poulain
Guest
Lou Poulain

Re David Wh
Bollocks! Schofield was bishop of the DioSJ for years and was never disciplined for being conservative. Nobody has ever forced him, or Duncan or Iker, or anybody else to ordain a woman or openly gay person. Nobody disciplined these guys for anything all these years. Nobody is pushing them out the door. Where did this pathetic martyr complex come from?
Lou

counterlight
Guest
counterlight

An arrogant and feckless Governor of New York and an arrogant and feckless Bishop of San Joaquin lost their offices today. They each have no one to blame but themselves.

So forget ’em!

It’s time to start over. Spring and Easter are both on the way with the promise of new life.

4 May 1535+
Guest
4 May 1535+

“Both Houses are members of the Anglican Communion. They are not – or should not be – two separate Churches. It is the leadership of The Episcopal Church that is treating itself as a separate and unique Church. They may do so, but they ought not expect everyone to follow teaching that serves only to undermine the authority of the Bible and ultimately leads to lifestyles that are destructive.” No, again. This is not true, whether said by JDS or Prof. Seitz or Canon Kearon or +Cantuar (all of whom, if I remember correctly, have recently uncautiously referred to an… Read more »

Scott Gunn
Guest

Puh-lease! Read the Anglican Communion Network statement. This is not scorched earth from ECUSA. It’s scorching hypocrisy from the ACN.

I nattered on about this on my little blog, but my basic point was this. You can’t break the rules, face the appropriate consequences, and then feign surprise or outrage. It’s the worst kind of hypocrisy.

It’s a sad day for the church. I just hope it’s one step in allowing ECUSA to move on.

Pax,
Scott+

Pat O'Neill
Guest
Pat O'Neill

David Wh: It is quite clear that TEC was willing to tolerate Schofield and his brand of Anglicanism within itself, until he took the action to remove himself and his diocese from TEC–an entirely illegal and uncanonical action. Schofield plays games with semantics–nay, not with semantics, but capitalization–in his response, by consistently referring to “Communion” with a capital “C”, as though Canon IV.19.2 referred to the Anglican Communion, which it does not. It refers to the “communion” (lower case) of the Episcopal Church. And while Schofield may wish (or believe) that TEC and its sister churches (such as Southern Cone)… Read more »

Lapinbizarre
Guest
Lapinbizarre

“Now, what happens with his Lambeth invitation?”

Could be that the ABC is finally faced with an “either/or” decision that he can neither fudge nor duck.

Richard Lyon
Guest
Richard Lyon

I presume that if Rowan Williams in his infinite wisdom can withhold an invitation to the duly elected Bishop of New Hampshire he can allow the duly deposed Bishop of San Joaquin to attend.

Lapinbizarre
Guest
Lapinbizarre

PS What’s with LibTEC? A new sneer-word for the conservatively politically-correct?

Rae Fletcher
Guest

Hmm.. as a priest, I am entrusted with the care of my parish by my bishop and the church. As a bishop, one is entrusted with the care of the diocese by the House of bishops (depending on jurisdiction) who approve the election and the national church or province that has created the diocese. The diocese is held in trust for the Church canonically defined as having created that diocese. This is not a matter of “faith” but a matter of breach of trust. I would have the utmost respect for Bp Schofield if he had resigned from his diocese… Read more »

Bruce Barber
Guest
Bruce Barber

Of course “LibTEC” includes everyone. Newsflash: the majority of TEC believe in the direction it is going. Some don’t. They choose to pick up their marbles and play in another sandbox…problem is that the marbles are not theirs!

If this were a rational response, lots of Americans would be leaving the country right now because of what W has done to this country…now, would that be an adult way to respond? No. And it is not in the church either.

Joe
Guest
Joe

On Jan 3, 1521 Martin Luther was excommunicated by Pope Leo X.

Stand firm +JDS!

Jon
Guest

It’s hard to provide satisfactory protection for legitimate dissenters when they insist that the only thing that would be satisfactory is a third province, something not even the CoE has thought appropriate so far.

Jon

Marshall Scott
Guest

Sorry, david wh, but “legitimate dissenters” do so within the constitutional processes of the national church in question, whether the Church of England or the Episcopal Church or any other. Bishop Schofield’s efforts to deny, ignore, and disparage the constitutional processes of the Episcopal Church don’t offer much hope of how he will deal with those of the Southern Cone – oh, wait! The constitutional processes of the Southern Cone would require him to retire. Well, then…. Whatever Bishop Schofield thinks “should not be,” the Anglican Communion, from multiple Lambeth Conferences on out, has never understood itself as a contiguous… Read more »

Malcolm+
Guest

Presumably both of these gentlemen are now disinvited to Lambeth. Cantuar himself established the precedent when he invited the legitimate Bishop of Recife and not the Souther Cone imposter.

Pluralist
Guest

I think there is a spare place for Bishop Schofield in the marketplace area of the Lambeth Conference.

revkarenm
Guest
revkarenm

My prayers ascend for Bishop Schofield and those choosing to leave TEC with him. Bishop Schofield’s letter of response to the action of the HOB includes some of the same unrealistic thinking that has characterized those wishing to leave TEC and transfer to another province. So, let’s be clear. The Anglican Communion is not a worldwide Church, governed by the ABC, the Primates, and the Lambeth Conference, even though the ABC seems to act like it is. Those wishing to leave TEC, and Bishop John-David, want to recreate reality in a way that suits them. The “Communion of the Church”,when… Read more »

Wilf
Guest
Wilf

On Lambeth invitations. I thought that to be invited to Lambeth one had to be a bishop. It looks as though Mr Schofield is now being legally deposed from his orders. Not being a bishop should mean that he is not able to attend Lambeth 2008, whether he was invited in the first place or not.

Padre Mickey
Guest

David wh,
The former Bishop Schofield spent his entire episcopate trying to find ways to take the diocese of San Joaquin out of TEC. He only got what’s coming to him.

JCF
Guest
JCF

“On Jan 3, 1521 Martin Luther was excommunicated by Pope Leo X. Stand firm +JDS!” Ironic, Joe, in that xJDS almost certainly sides more w/ Pope Leo, than w/ Martin Luther. Martin Luther, unlike xJDS, was willing to both take a “stand” against his ecclesial authorities, AND pay the consequences for that stand. xJDS has been trying to play a game, wherein he could repudiate, *without* paying the consequences. That game came to an end, TODAY. As I said above: “Lord have mercy”—upon us all, AND “Thanks be to God!” (most of all, for the besieged Episcopalians of San Joaquin,… Read more »

Pat O'Neill
Guest
Pat O'Neill

“On Jan 3, 1521 Martin Luther was excommunicated by Pope Leo X.

Stand firm +JDS!”

And Luther accepted that excommunication and founded his own church. He didn’t go around claiming the Pope had no authority to do it.

Viriato da Silva
Guest
Viriato da Silva

This is all well and good, albeit a tad overdue — but whe can we please move on to the deposition of +Bob Pittsburgh, +Jack Leo Ft. Worth, et al.?

Retirement eternal grant unto them, O LORD.

Lapinbizarre
Guest
Lapinbizarre

Schofield’s statement “In the end, it appears as though the real motivation behind all of this is the use of raw power and coveting property” seems to be one thing on which many of us can agree.

Göran Koch-Swahne
Guest

I find it most curious – and worth pondering – with regard to the pre modern, Modern, late modern, anti Modern cultural Time line(s), that the deposed bishop apparently does not understand the great difference (in pre modern Times) between a Breach of Trust (such as his) and a Breach of Faith (such as he falsesly attributes to TEC).

Someone genuinely pre modern (the real thing) would abhore the disloyalty and exclude him from Society à la 1215 (cf “dying die” in Genesis 1:17).

Göran Koch-Swahne
Guest

make that 2:17…

: = (

Göran Koch-Swahne
Guest

What did Mr Cox do?

Andrew Carey
Guest
Andrew Carey

Seeking clarification. Bishops Cox and Schofield are being described by some as ‘Mr’. Is it the view of The Episcopal Church that deposition constitutes removal of his ordination and consecration? If reconciliation were to come about would there be a need to re-ordain him? My understanding is that TEC is saying that Bishop Schofield is no longer a Bishop of TEC, but is not making a judgement over whether he is a bishop. That would indeed be an extraordinary and sweeping judgement to make by way of this process.

Simon Sarmiento
Guest

Andrew

I think that’s a good question, and my understanding is the same as yours.

I might add that we have declined to publish a fair number of comments in the past that referred to bishops in this way. Perhaps we should continue to do so. Certainly I deprecate such usage. Please would commenters refrain from it.

EPfizH
Guest
EPfizH

On the issue of Lambeth. Precedent is here mentionec on +Cavalcanti Recife. Simon, can you check on the status of an invitation for +Bakare Harare and the status of invitation for +Elston Jakasi Manicaland. I believe an important precedent, Central Africa, is in play. +Jakasi and +Kunonga both attempted to leave Central Africa for Kenya and take their dioceses with them. Central Africa deposed them stating they could leave, as individuals, but not the dioceses …essentially the same case argued by TEC. +Jakasi has apparently recanted, +Kunonga, who didn’t receive a Lambeth invitation, has not, but he was replaced temporarily… Read more »

david wh
Guest
david wh

Pat, Lou (no need to be obscene!)

+John-David took action after TEC definitively rejected appeals to return to the Christian fold by repenting of the consecration of Gen Robinson, falling out of communion with many orthodox provinces. Like many Anglican Bishops he doesn’t believe in the fudge cooked up by TEC and Lambeth palace. And as you know, his diocese is not the only one moving out of TEC (have you forgotten already!)

TEC is not a safe place for orthodox Christian beievers, clergy or Bishops.

david wh
Guest
david wh

Bruce Barber wrote “the majority of TEC believe in the direction it is going.”

How can TEC be right if just a “majority” believe? Freudian slip? All TEC believe in THE Way – Jesus Christ – and be following Him!

4May1535+
Guest
4May1535+

Andrew, Simon–re: “Mr. Schofield” I think this usage is, now, within TEC at least, actually correct–or, perhaps, Dr. Schofield, since he has a D.D.. Like the many laicized RC clergy one knows, he retains his orders, and if he were somehow to be reinstated, he would not be reordained. Nonetheless, one does not call these laicized priests “Father” or “The Reverend….”: losing the style and title of the ordained ministry goes along with one’s deposition from the exercise of that ministry. Certainly, if I were to be defrocked tomorrow, I would still be a priest, but no one would expect… Read more »

John-Julian,OJN
Guest
John-Julian,OJN

Andrew: You certainly know better. Deposition removes from the deposed the responsibilities, the faculties, and the perquisites of the office. Therefore, John-David Schofield no longer has the canonical right to use the titles, wear the distinctive clothing, or undertake any of the functions of a bishop in/of the Episcopal Church. Ontologically, he remains a bishop, but without faculties in the Episcopal Church. Should he repent and be reconciled, the deposition would be lifted and all those faculties and perquisites would be returned to him. No Episcopalian is required to recognize his episcopal role in the Southern Cone, but it would… Read more »

Marshall Scott
Guest

Andrew, Simon: the action of the House of Bishops is a statement of Schofield’s and Cox’s capacity to function within the Episcopal Church. It is not a reflection any indelible mark in ordination, nor on the possibility of their recognition by another Christian body. Thus, we say a person is “deposed” – removed from position, and from the responsibilities and perquisites thereof – and not somehow “de-ordained.” That said, an Episcopalian might address him as “Bishop” in the same way – no more and no less – that they would a Bishop in a pentecostal body: acknowledging out of courtesy… Read more »

Robert Ian Williams
Guest
Robert Ian Williams

Is anyone running a book on whether Rowan will rescind his invite to Lambeth?

BobinSwPA
Guest
BobinSwPA

It’s like the My county in the state of Pennsylvania saying it doesn’t want to be a part of Pennsylvania and joining Maryland or West virginia. If we were allowed to do that people might be changing and switching all over the place. Might make the map makers happy but what a mess. Also, counties are creations of the state much like diocese’ are creations of the national church. How do you just pick and chose who you like this week??

Göran Koch-Swahne
Guest

Mr Carey wrote: “Seeking clarification. Bishops Cox and Schofield are being described by some as ‘Mr’. Is it the view of The Episcopal Church…”

Church of Sweden here, Sir.

Traditionally we stress the “outer calling” of the Congregation of the Holy (= the Church) and the “inner calling” of the Holy Ghost.

But we don’t do “indelible” much.

We never had either the Mandatory Celibacy or the “Canonical” Testament of the Gregorian Reformers. And our Chapters have remained “irregular” in Rome’s mind, and our Parishes still own the buildings (incl. church) and the properties.

We didn’t do “Gregorian” much.

John B. Chilton
Guest

If ABC sticks by the rules he set Schofield would not be invited to Lambeth. He fits the category of border-crossing bishops from AMiA, CANA, et al. +Carey did not invite AMiA, and +Williams has said he’d follow the same policy.

BTW, anyone give credence to the CEN story that the recently named Windsor Continuation Group (WCG) will look at the invitations question?

david wh
Guest
david wh

It will look funny when +Rowan invites a pretend TEC bishop of San Joaquin who just has a few churches in his care and probably won’t even be consecrated in time for Lambeth, and disinvites +John-David who is the duly elected and consecrated Bishhop for the vast majority!

Just disinvite all TEC Bishops Rowan! If not for the gay blessings thing and the not refraining thing, then for refusing to make adequate arrangements for dissenters and for continuing to press legal actions. What else will stop the mess spreading beyond North America?..

Pat O'Neill
Guest
Pat O'Neill

“+John-David took action after TEC definitively rejected appeals to return to the Christian fold by repenting of the consecration of Gen Robinson, falling out of communion with many orthodox provinces. Like many Anglican Bishops he doesn’t believe in the fudge cooked up by TEC and Lambeth palace. And as you know, his diocese is not the only one moving out of TEC (have you forgotten already!)” Right–so he had every right to leave TEC. No one’s stopping him. What he doesn’t have a right to do is a)take his diocese and its property with him; and b)still claim to be… Read more »

PseudoPiskie
Guest

david wh said: “TEC is not a safe place for orthodox Christian beievers, clergy or Bishops.”

What is there to fear? Besides possibly gay cooties? I don’t see or hear anything that might harm anyone in our parish. Sermons are usually preached on the lessons for the day. Is it different in an “orthodox” parish?

Or is it possible that an “orthodox” person might hear something which causes her to think about what she believes and possibly grow? And possibly leave the control of the “orthodox” preacher?

Robert Ian Williams
Guest
Robert Ian Williams

Could bad language be censored from Thinking Anglicans… I object to B…..ks etc

Stephen Roberts
Guest
Stephen Roberts

Robert – But if Simon censored the b…..ks what would we have left to talk about (cheeky grin) ?

Joe
Guest
Joe

“…xJDS almost certainly sides more w/ Pope Leo, than w/ Martin Luther.” I have to think that you actually believe this, why else would you write it? And yet, putting our theological differences aside, you have to see how patently absurd your claim is. ML based his theological divergence with the praxis of the Church leaders on the claims of sacred Scripture, whilst Pope Leo defended his (re)actions against ML on the basis of canon law. Now, tell me, where’s the incongruence with our contemporary situation? …no, that’s not irony, my friend, it’s analogy – and just as I inferred.… Read more »

Joe
Guest
Joe

“And Luther accepted that excommunication and founded his own church. He didn’t go around claiming the Pope had no authority to do it.” Pat, your friends cringed when they read your response. Fact is, ML publicly burned Exsurge Domine – the bull demanding he recant – along with books of (gasp!) canon law, shouting (undoubtedly with a beer in hand!) “Because you [Pope Leo X] have confounded the truth of God, today the Lord confounds you. Into the fire with you!” If you call that accepting without rejecting…well, whatever… What’s more, ML never claimed to be establishing “his own church”.… Read more »

david wh
Guest
david wh

Pat, ECUSA wasn’t very hospitable but, after CG 2003, TEC has become an unsafe place for non-liberals. TEC has no room for non-liberals to be included with integrity.

Pat O'Neill
Guest
Pat O'Neill

Joe:

Luther didn’t attempt to take over the RC church, he just left–declaring it sinful, etc., yes, but without attempting to abscond with its property.

David:

Exactly what has TEC ever done to make itself inhospitable to conservatives who didn’t insist on making everybody else follow THEM?