Updated Thursday
Episcopal Café has the story, Rift amongst conservative Episcopalians is showing.
In the first public sign of disagreement among theologically conservative clergy in the Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh over the leadership of Bishop Robert W. Duncan Jr., 12 such rectors and priests told him this week they disapprove of his effort to remove the diocese from the Episcopal Church and will, instead, remain with the denomination.
The 12, including the president of the diocese’s clergy association and its longest-tenured rector, mailed a signed, one-paragraph letter yesterday to the diocese’s 66 churches saying that while they supported the “reformation of the Episcopal Church … we have determined to remain within, and not realign out of” it….TO THE PEOPLE AND CLERGY OF THE EPISCOPAL DIOCESE OF PITTSBURGH:
We are rectors and clergy in good standing of the Diocese of Pittsburgh who believe the best way forward for renewal and reformation of the Episcopal Church is support for the Windsor Report and its recommendations. While we understand the need of many of our brothers and sisters to leave the Episcopal Church, we have determined to remain within, and not re-align out of, the Episcopal Church. We intend to “keep alert and always persevere in supplication for all the saints” (Ephesians 6:6).
Dated this 29th day of January, 2008:
• The Rev. Nancy Chalfant-Walker, priest in charge of St. Stephen’s, Wilkinsburg
• The Rev. Jay Geisler, rector of St. Stephen’s, McKeesport
• The Rev. Daniel Hall, priest associate, assigned to First Lutheran Church
• The Rev. Norman Koehler, priest, chaplain at Presbyterian Senior Care, Oakmont
• The Rev. Jeffrey Murph, rector of St. Thomas’, Oakmont
• The Rev. Scott Quinn, rector of Church of the Nativity, Crafton
• The Rev. Bruce Robison, rector of St. Andrews’, Highland Park
• The Rev. James Shoucair, rector of Christ Church, North Hills
• The Rev. James Simons, St. Michael’s of the Valley, Ligonier
• The Rev. Stephen Smalley, rector of St. Barnabas’, Brackenridge
• The Rev. Philip Wainwright, rector of St. Peter’s, Brentwood
• The Rev. Don Youse, priest in charge, Emmanuel, North Side
Thursday updates
Here are some links I did not have time to include here yesterday:
Pittsburgh Post-Gazette Steve Levin Letter shows rift among Episcopal conservatives
Episcopal News Service PITTSBURGH: Group of priests tells Duncan they will not leave Episcopal Church
And a later article at Episcopal Café notes that:
…of the 180 clergy others are in progressive parishes and were not part of this group of 12 conservatives. It has been estimated that together the opponents of the course Duncan is [taking] could represent as much as 45 percent of average Sunday attendance in the diocese.
Updated Thursday
Fulcrum has published an article that also appears in this week’s Church of England Newspaper by Graham Kings entitled Substance and Shadow: Lambeth Conference and GAFCON. An extract:
…What is being planned to happen at GAFCON? No mention is made of the background documents of the Lambeth Conference: The Windsor Report, the Covenant Process and the Advent Letter of the Archbishop of Canterbury. At the Ontario conference mentioned above, Chris Sugden described a group of Anglicans (and implied he was included in the definition) who are made up of:
those who disagree with The Episcopal Church in its teaching on doctrines and ethics, and no longer trust the Archbishop of Canterbury to deal adequately with the problem.
This ‘no longer trusting in the Archbishop of Canterbury’ matches his earlier article, ‘Not Schism but Revolution’, in Evangelicals Now (September 2007), where he stated, after a quotation from Bishop Bob Duncan of Pittsburgh:
In other words, since the Archbishop of Canterbury has not provided for the safe oversight of the orthodox in the United States, he has forfeited his role as the one who gathers the Communion.
Some of the planners of GAFCON have a tendency to be militant. They are intent on the setting up a ‘shadow Communion’ not centred on Canterbury. This ‘non-Canterbury Communion’ is openly being discussed on conservative American web sites. The insistence that there are now ‘two branches’ of the Anglican Communion is a crucial part of the deposited legal defence of the churches of the Anglican District of Virginia, part of the Convocation of Anglicans in North America (CANA) led by Martyn Minns, against The Episcopal Church…
Thursday updates
Vinay Samuel has written a letter to the Church of England Newspaper see Dr Vinay Samuel responds to Bishop Tom Wright.
Archbishop Peter Akinola held a press conference in Lagos about GAFCON, see Press Conference - 30th January 2007:
The Primate of Nigeria, the Most Reverend Peter Akinola, gave a press conference in Lagos, Nigeria on January 30 announcing the Global Anglican Future Conference (GAFCON) in the Holy Land. The occasion was a gathering of the GAFCON Theology Resource Team.
Archbishop Akinola said:
“We are planning a conference in the Holy Land in the month of June: GAFCON - Global Anglican Future Conference. That conference is called by those members of the Anglican Family who see themselves as orthodox Anglicans, who are upholding the authority of scriptures, and believe that the time has come to come together to fashion the future of our Anglican family. This has to be done within a theological framework. They will be producing a book to help all members of the conference to study beforehand. That book will cover the themes for the conference. What are the challenges? Why are some people deviating from the orthodox faith? Why are they allowing modern culture to overwhelm the word of God. They will be highlighting the Lordship of Jesus Christ over his church and over the world. If the Lord is king why are people not following his leadership? Why are people interpreting this word in a way that suits their fancy?
We must also look at the Church of God in our time and the whole area of its mission : what is God doing in our time, responding to the needs of our time – e.g. Aids, poverty, corruption, good and bad governance. We are going to use that conference to address all these issues.
By early May the book will be available. These are very exciting times. On behalf of the Church of Nigeria and GAFCON I want to thank you for spending sleepless nights brainstorming for us to give us the road map that will guide us in our generation.”
Press Questions
What led to the creation of GAFCON? There is the Lambeth Conference and the ACC. There are three bodies. Is the church of USA represented in GAFCON?
Primate: Let me answer the last question first: America as a church is not part of GAFCON. But there are many individual members of the church, bishops, each in his own right that will be part of GAFCON. Officially TEC is not part of GAFCON.
What led to GAFCON? It is a very long story. In the last five years we have had this endless controversy in the Anglican Communion. To the world this is about homosexuality. To us it is just a symptom of the real problem. Homosexuality is not peculiar to Anglicans but Anglicans have the courage to discuss it openly. The issue is that there are members of our Anglican family who are not paying attention to scripture, but are giving prominence to modern culture. They are bringing new principles to interpret scripture. The word of God has precedence over any culture. Those of us who will abide with the Word of God, come rain come fire, are those who are in GAFCON.
Those who say it does not matter are the ones who are attending Lambeth. There might be a view, for whatever it is worth, that they want to be there to observe what is going on. But Uganda, Rwanda, Sydney, Nigeria: we are not going to Lambeth conference. What is the use of the Lambeth conference for a three weeks’ jamboree which will sweep these issues under the carpet. GAFCON will confer about the future of the church, which will set a road map for the future. We are a movement that will move away from the “maybe - maybe not”.
The issue is that church leaders are endorsing what is wrong. They are not willing to make the gospel that the Lord can bring change available. We want to move forward with commitment to the word of God. The question is asked how many people we are. The question is rather how many people we are representing. Four primates who are in the leadership of GAFCON represent more than 30 million Anglicans…
The press conference also refers to the paper Global Anglican Orthodoxy: A Blueprint by Stephen Noll which is available on the GAFCON site.
Updated
Episcopal News Service has South Carolina consecrates Lawrence as 14th bishop.
The Living Church has South Carolina Celebrates Bishop Lawrence’s Consecration:
… The Rt. Rev. Clifton Daniel III, Bishop of East Carolina and president of Province 4, was the chief consecrator. Co-consecrators were: the Rt. Rev. Edward L. Salmon, Jr., retired Bishop of South Carolina; the Rt. Rev. C. FitzSimons Allison, retired Bishop of South Carolina; the Rt. Rev. Michael Scott-Joynt, Bishop of Winchester in the Church of England; the Rt. Rev. Keith L. Ackerman, Bishop of Quincy; and the Rt. Rev. Julio Cesar Holguin, Bishop of the Dominican Republic.
In all, some 40 bishops participated, including the Rt. Rev. Benjamin A. Kwashi, Bishop of Jos in the Anglican Church of Nigeria; the Rt. Rev. Anthony Burton, Bishop of Saskatchewan in the Anglican Church of Canada; the Rt. Rev. John H. Rodgers, interim dean of Trinity Episcopal School for Ministry and retired missionary bishop for the Anglican Mission in the Americas; and the Rt. Rev. Robert Duncan, Bishop of Pittsburgh and moderator of the Anglican Communion Network. The preacher was the Rt. Rev. Alden Hathaway, retired Bishop of Pittsburgh. As a young priest, Bishop Lawrence served under Bishop Hathaway. Bishop Lawrence is the first graduate of Trinity seminary to be consecrated a bishop of The Episcopal Church…
And the report later continues:
…In an interview after the consecration with The Living Church, Dean McKeachie referred to a statement he recently published on the internet for insight into the likely near-term future of the diocese. “Our hope in South Carolina is that Mark Lawrence’s consecration, along with the present Archbishop of Canterbury’s willingness to follow his predecessor’s lead, will bear fruit at Lambeth 2008 in a clear and definitive affirmation, on the part of the vast majority of bishops present, that the Anglican Communion is (in Archbishop Williams’ words) ‘truly a gift of God to the wholeness of Christ’s Church’.”
Here’s the text of the sermon preached by Bishop Alden Hathaway.
Geoffrey Rowell writes that Paul shows how faith could turn all our lives around in The Times.
Alan Wilson also writes about Saint Paul, in The Power of Love.
Stephen Smith writes about the Holocaust in the Guardian’s Face to Faith column.
Christopher Howse writes in the Daily Telegraph about a Coincidence in a Bath bookshop.
Giles Fraser writes in the Church Times about Technology: does it dispel the wonder?
And the Church Times carried a leader about Christian unity: Two ways to hold the body together.
Updated yet again Monday evening
First, at the Lambeth press conference on Monday, the Archbishop of Canterbury said this, as reported by the Living Church in response to a question about Bishop John-David Schofield:
Regarding the attendance of San Joaquin Bishop John-David Schofield, inhibited by the Presiding Bishop earlier this month, the archbishop said he is “waiting on what comes out of the American House of Bishops’ discussion of that. It’s not something I’ve got a position on yet. At the moment he still has an invitation.”
Second, there are several reports from Episcopal News Service that relate:
San Joaquin: ‘Moving Forward, Welcoming All’ conference to host online audience January 26
and
Province VIII seeks lay representative for vacated Executive Council seat
And then there was this statement from Forward in Faith North America FiF NA President responds to inhibition of Bishop Schofield.
And finally, there was a letter in last week’s Church Times by the Bishop of Horsham, see Why I signed the San Joaquin letter.
Friday evening update
Here is the official ACO page for the Diocese of San Joaquin.
Saturday evening update
Episcopal News Service reports that San Joaquin Standing Committee not recognized as official, Presiding Bishop says.
The full text of the letter she sent to the committee members can be read here (PDF).
Monday evening updates
There are various opinions being expressed about this letter, see:
Updated again Saturday morning
According to the Church Times in this report by Pat Ashworth headlined Dawani fails to divert GAFCON ‘pilgrims’:
THE ORGANISERS of the Global Anglican Future Conference (GAFCON) insist that they will be holding the event in Jerusalem, despite strong protests and an alternative suggestion from the Bishop in Jerusalem, the Rt Revd Suheil Dawani, and his colleagues in the Holy Land.
However, the following announcement has just appeared on the GAFCON website:
Global Anglican Future - Travel Plans
This morning we have released the following communication on behalf of the leadership team of GAFCON:
“We have heard that GAFCON has aroused considerable interest and enthusiasm. We would encourage those who are planning visits to the Holy Land to coincide with GAFCON to await the announcement of the venue and the exact start and finish dates before making final plans”
The GAFCON Leadership Team.
An article in today’s Church Times by Bishop Tom Wright, criticising GAFCON, is behind the subscription paywall until next Friday now available there, and also at Fulcrum, but you can read criticism of the article by going to this blog post here.
Friday afternoon update
According to Ruth Gledhill writing on her blog, Gafcon ‘to take place as planned’:
Paul Eddy, doing the PR for Gafcon, insists that nothing has changed. He says: ‘The final details of venue, hotels are being finalised, a team was out in Middle East just last week with conference and hotel and transport reps, all according to plan. Full details to be sent out to non-Bishops March 1.’ He continues, ‘The timetable agreed at the beginning has always been that Bishops nominate clergy and lay folk and the official invites will be sent to non-Bishops on March 1.’
She also includes a link to the report of the 1998 Lambeth Conference, by Andrew Brown which is available at How Christians love each other.
Last week’s Church Times had a clutch of letters about GAFCON. See Both a gaffe and a con? The Global Anglican Future Conference.
Saturday morning
The article by Tom Wright is now also available here at Covenant.
Paul Handley wrote in the Church Times about Monday’s press conference:
Lambeth Conference to go ahead with most of the bishops present.
(Scroll down for other information about the programme, the cost, and the spouses conference.)
From the blogs:
Alan Wilson gives some background on Indaba in The Morning After: Indaba or Prozac?
He then also comments on the press coverage in Ten Rules for cooking up a Gay Schism:
Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear. Are we wobbling off piste? Reporting the same Lambeth Conference launch, Riazat Butt in the Guardian concludes “Gay Climate of controversy clouds Anglican gathering” whilst, probably more accurately, Ruth Gledhill of the Times reports “Sexuality will barely be on the Lambeth Conference agenda.” The blue train is wobbling on the tracks, friends. Entirely as an exercise in communications studies (and not theology, you understand) may I humbly propose a facetious little something to help keep this thing rolling…
Only Connect has an article by Paul Bagshaw titled Lambeth Conference in no sense a law making body.
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.
Updated Tuesday evening
At yesterday’s press conference about Lambeth 2008, Rowan Williams was asked about GAFCON. He replied:
I think it’s important to remember that before the last Lambeth, and indeed on other occasions, there have been major international gatherings — regionally or in other ways constructed — preparing for Lambeth, and I am very happy to see such regional events going forward. But I do have real concerns that in this case there are unresolved issues for the local Church, for the Church in Jerusalem, which has pinpointed some anxieties about having such a conference at this time in the Holy Land. I really hope they can be addressed.
Here is a link to the Bishop in Jerusalem’s earlier press statement.
More recently, the Bishop in Jerusalem held two meetings about the GAFCON proposal, separately with the Archbishop of Sydney and then two days later with the Primate of Nigeria. The minutes of both those meetings can be found here.
This is reported on the Guardian website in Bishops attack rival summit for Anglican clergy in Holy Land by Riazat Butt.
Update
Further reports on this:
Episcopal News Service has GAFCON organizers challenge Jerusalem bishop’s concerns for planned Holy Land event by Matthew Davies
Ruth Gledhill has Gafcon ‘disastrous’ for Holy Land says local bishop on her blog and Rival Lambeth conference ‘disastrous’ for Jerusalem in Times Online.
Most papers for next month’s General Synod are now online and are listed below. We will update the list as the remainder become available.
Updated 29 January to link to remaining papers
Agenda
Monday 11 February
Tuesday 12 February
Wednesday 13 February
Thursday 14 February
Special Agenda I (Legislative Business)
Papers for debate
The day set for debate is shown in brackets. Deemed business will only be debated if there is a request from members for this to happen.
GS 1598D Amending Canon No 27 (Tuesday)
GS 1599C Vacancy in See Committees Regulation 1993 (Tuesday)
GS 1637A Draft Ecclesiastical Offices (Terms of Service) Measure (Tuesday)
GS 1638A Draft Ecclesiastical Offices (Terms of Service) Regulations (Tuesday)
GS 1639A Draft Amending Canon No 29 (Tuesday)
GS 1637-9Y Report by the Revision Committee
GS Misc 874 Background Note to Illustrative Material
GS 1642A Draft Amending Canon No 28 (Wednesday)
GS 1642Y Report by the Revision Committee
GS 1672 Draft Ecclesiastical Fees (Amendment) Measure (Wednesday)
GS 1672X Explanatory Memorandum
GS Misc 877 Four Funerals and a Wedding
GS 1673 Growing Together in Unity and Mission (Thursday)
GS 1675 Report by the Business Committee (Monday)
GS 1677 Forty-Second Report of the Standing Orders Committee (deemed business)
First Notice Paper
GS 1678 Mental Health Issues (Wednesday)
GS 1679 Anglican Communion Covenant (Wednesday)
Annex 1 and Annex 2
GS 1680 Crown Appointments (Thursday)
Annex
GS 1681 Detention without Charge (Thursday)
GS 1682 Draft Church of England Pensions (Amendment) Measure (Tuesday)
GS 1682X Explanatory Memorandum
GS 1683 Draft Church of England (Miscellaneous Provisions) Measure (deemed business)
GS 1683X Explanatory Memorandum
GS 1684 Code of Practice under Part V of the Dioceses, Pastoral and Mission Measure 2007 (Tuesday)
GS Misc 875A and GS Misc 875B Casinos (private member’s motion - Tuesday)
GS Misc 876A and GS Misc 876B Eucharistic Prayer for Children (Diocesan Synod motion - Wednesday)
GS Misc 878A and GS Misc 878B Bible Availability (private member’s motion - Thursday)
Other papers circulated to members of the General Synod
GS Misc 873 Review of Extended Communion: Analysis of Diocesan Responses
GS Misc 881 Zimbabwe
The Anglican Church of Canada has issued this press release: Archbishop of Canterbury responds to Primate’s letter.
This relates to the letter reported here.
January 21, 2008 — Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams has written to Canadian Primate Archbishop Fred Hiltz to say that he “cannot support or sanction” foreign interventions in the affairs of the Canadian Church.
Archbishop Williams was responding to a letter Archbishop Hiltz wrote to all the Primates of the Anglican Communion earlier this year in which he explained where the Canadian Church was in its discussion of same-sex blessings.In that letter, Archbishop Hiltz appealed to the Archbishop of Canterbury “in his capacity as one of the Instruments of Communion and as chair of the Primates’ Meeting to address the very serious issues raised by this intervention and to make clear that such actions are not a valid expression of Anglicanism.”
The full text of Archbishop Williams’ letter follows:
“Thank you very much for your letter about the situation in the Canadian Church; I thought it very helpful, clear and eirenic, and I hope it will be well received.
“I noted also the reference to the appeal of the Canadian Church to myself about interventions and irregular ordinations: as you will understand, I have no canonical authority to prevent these things, but I would simply repeat what was said in my Advent Letter, to the effect that I cannot support or sanction such actions, in line with what successive Lambeth Resolutions and Primates’ Communiques have declared, as well as the statements of my predecessor about irregular ordinations and the clear directions of the Windsor Report.
“I apologise for not responding sooner to this, but had had to focus in December on the preparation of the Advent Letter, which was intended to set out a perspective within which all such irregularities should be viewed.”
Updated again Wednesday evening
Today, a press briefing was held at Lambeth Palace to launch the 2008 Lambeth Conference.
Here is the official press release.
Here is information about the programme.
Episcopal News Service has published Lambeth Conference program launched; audio streams available.
Press reports so far:
Riazat Butt Guardian Gay ‘climate of controversy’ clouds Anglican gathering and later Williams puts sexuality on the agenda for bishops.
Ruth Gledhill The Times Six hundred bishops sign up for Lambeth despite threats of schism and also blog article The importance of Archbishop Ernest and Boycott fear on conference.
Update Tuesday evening
Lambeth Palace has released video recordings of the press conference:
Update Wednesday evening
Dave Walker has written about the event at Launch of the Lambeth Conference. Dave has an important role in the Conference, as explained here.
The Church of England General Synod will meet in London from Monday 11 February to Thursday 14 February. The official press release is here and starts:
Major debates on detention without charge, mental health issues and casinos will be on the agenda of the General Synod when it meets at Church House, Westminster, from Monday, February 11, to Thursday, February 14, 2008. There is a large programme of legislative business, the most substantial item being the Revision Stage of the Clergy Terms of Service legislation. Synod will have further opportunity to debate the Anglican Communion Covenant and Senior Church (Crown) Appointments, following earlier debates in July 2007, and there will also be a focus on Anglican-Roman Catholic dialogue.
We will be linking to the full agenda and online papers as these become available. There is an outline agenda which you can download here or read online here.
Updated Monday morning
Dan Martins an Episcopal priest who was formerly in the Diocese of San Joaquin reports on his blog about what happened on Saturday to the Standing Committee of that diocese in A Saturday Morning Massacre:
…In the post previous to this one, I drew attention to the role of the Standing Committee in the Diocese of San Joaquin. All eight members—four clergy and four lay—are solidly orthodox in their theological positions, all “reasserters.” All have been energetic supporters of Bishop Schofield’s advocacy for the received moral teaching of the Church Catholic. All have agonized over their relationship with an Episcopal Church that causes them shame and embarrassment at every turn. I am well acquainted with five of the eight, and know two of the three others, having served on that very Standing Committee as recently as six months ago. I shared their mixed feelings when we contemplated our relationship with TEC and the Anglican Communion. We worked hard to present a united front with our bishop in bearing witness to the faith of the saints, apostles, prophets, and martyrs.
As of this morning, six of those eight are now ex-members of the San Joaquin Standing Committee. Only … which ones are the six and which ones are the “remaining” two?
Here are the facts…
…Then we have this , from the duly-elected president of the Standing Committee:
During the Standing Committee meeting of January 19th, the Bishop determined that the elected members of the Standing Committee who had not publicly affirmed their standing in the Southern Cone [whose congregations are in discernment, some over the legality of convention’s actions] were unqualified to hold any position of leadership in the Diocese, including any elected office. He pronounced us as unqualified. No resignations were given. The question of resignations was raised and rejected. The members of the committee at this morning’s meeting were quite clear on this point, we did not resign, we were declared unqualified to hold office. The Bishop’s decision affects up to 6 of the 8 elected members of the Committee including all of the clergy members…
Let the record show that three of the four clergy members who are now clearly not members of the Standing Committee of the Southern Cone Diocese of San Joaquin are rectors of the three largest parishes of the diocese. Two of them are the two most senior priests of the diocese (in terms of time in cure) and the other is in the top five, having held his position for 12 years.
Bishop Schofield’s action has effectively (pardon the metaphor) “outed” these priests, revealing a divide within the diocese that cannot be casually dismissed. We’re not talking about the liberal fringe (I use “liberal” in a relative sense) who have always been malcontents in the diocese, now under the umbrella of Remain Episcopal. We’re talking about actual conservatives—those who, in grand San Joaquin tradition, wore out the ‘No’ buttons on their clickers during legislative sessions of the House of Deputies. We’re talking about the potential seeds of a viable continuing conservative TEC presence in the Central Valley of California…
Read the whole article, and here is the previous article mentioned: San Joaquin annotated.
Monday morning Update
Dan Martins has provided the names of some of those involved and additional confirmation of what happened, see Update…
Religion News Service has this report by Daniel Burke Episcopal Bishop Keeps Her Cool in the Hot Seat.
Episcopal News Service has reports of some areas of trouble:
The Living Church has a rather confusing headline on Dissident Groups Organize to Oppose Diocesan Departures.
From the Albany Times-Union there is House of Deputies president visits Albany as church faces rift. Note: I can’t reach that site at present, but there is a copy of the article here.
And Via Media USA has a Schism Quiz.
To see how Fr Jake applies this to Fort Worth, read this article.
The Episcopal Café reports that Bishop Frade consented to inhibition of Bishop Duncan:
The Rt. Rev. Leo Frade, Bishop of the Diocese of Southeast Florida has released the following statement explaining his consent to the inhibition of Bishops Duncan and Schofield:
Dearly Beloved in Christ:
Greetings from the Holy Land! While leading my yearly pilgrimage of the faithful to the land of our Lord Jesus, I have been asked to comment on the decision of the Three Senior Bishops to unanimously move to inhibit the Bishop of San Joaquin, but not to inhibit the Bishop of Pittsburgh.
I must state that after carefully examining the decision of the Review Committee headed by the Rt. Rev. Dorsey Henderson of the Diocese of Upper South Carolina, which recommended the move to inhibit both bishops—of the Dioceses of Pittsburgh and of San Joaquin—and after reviewing all the supporting documents that give evidence of their actions, I was astonished that we neglected to take action any sooner on their obvious violation and breach of their oath to engage to conform to the doctrine, discipline and worship of The Episcopal Church.
I firmly believe that any bishops whose words and actions are in violation of this oath, as stated by church canon, should be equally subject to the appropriate canonical discipline.
I also believe that it is my episcopal duty to assiduously safeguard both the membership and patrimony of our Church as a whole. The faithful of those dioceses that have been betrayed by their bishops need to know that they are not abandoned by their Church.
The Episcopate must not tolerate such actions as these bishops have taken; they have betrayed the trust that was given them when we, their brother and sister bishops, consented to their election. The seriousness of this betrayal is not mitigated by the fact that in one of the cases the goal of turning away from The Episcopal Church has not been fully achieved. As I have learned to say in America, “You can not just be a little pregnant.”
It was with great sadness that I concluded I had no other choice but to vote to move to inhibit two of my brothers who have betrayed their trust to be faithful shepherds of their dioceses, which are integral parts of our Episcopal Church.
The beauty and flexibility of Anglican polity has allowed since its foundation disparate and disagreeing parties to remain in full communion. It is my sincere hope and prayer that these two bishops, who once pledged of their own free will to engage to remain faithful to the doctrine, discipline and worship of the Episcopal Church, will in a spirit of reconciliation choose to fulfill their previous promises.
If they are unable to do so, we in the HOB must do our sad duty to discipline them and move in a timely manner to protect and provide for the many remaining faithful of these dioceses.
Blessings,
The Rt Rev Leopold Frade
Bishop of Southeast Florida and Senior Bishop with Jurisdiction of TEC. (780)
Ekklesia brings us a piece by Martin Marty titled Catholic but not necessarily Roman.
And also, Kersten Storch writes about Praying for unity across a century of division.
Peter Steinfels writes in the New York Times about Praying for Christian Unity, When Diversity Has Been the Answer.
Roderick Strange writes in the Tablet about Newman, in Saintly, but very human.
The Guardian has Theo Hobson writing Face to Faith, and he argues that The Church of England’s gay crisis makes clear that that liberal Anglicanism is finished.
In the Church Times Giles Fraser writes that I cannot eat at your table, Plato.
From last week’s Church Times:
Why hold a conservative Anglican conference?
The gathering is vital to ensure that Churches are not overwhelmed by Western culture, argues Chris Sugden:
Archbishops and bishops from both the Evangelical and Anglo-Catholic wings of the Church, who lead 30 million of the world’s 55 million active Anglicans, will make a pilgrimage to the Holy Land in June 2008 for the Global Anglican Future Conference (GAFCON: News, 4 January). They are travelling to the places of Christ’s ministry, where the gift of the Holy Spirit was first poured out, in order to strengthen them for what they believe will be difficult days ahead…
The Lead at Episcopal Café has this report: Bishop Wimberly: why I did not consent to inhibition
Bishop Don Wimberly of Texas has released the following statement on his reasons for not consenting to inhibit Bishop Duncan of Pittsburgh:
Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori asked me along with the other two most senior bishops (Peter Lee of Virginia and Leo Frade of Southeast Florida) for consent to move forward with two inhibitions, one for John-David Scofield, Bishop of San Joaquin and Robert Duncan, Bishop of Pittsburg[h], for abandonment of the Communion of the Church. We consented to Scofield because the Diocese of San Joaquin had recently voted to leave the Episcopal Church. We did not consent to the request for Bishop Duncan because the Diocese of Pittsburgh has not held their annual convention yet and therefore has not formalized any change to their membership within the Episcopal Church, as the Diocese of San Joaquin had. Even though waiting postpones the issue coming before the House of Bishops, I believe it is prudent to take every precaution and afford Bishop Duncan the opportunity to remain in the Episcopal Church.
The Rt. Rev. Don A. Wimberly, Bishop of Texas
It is not known whether or not the other senior bishops gave consent.
Updated again Friday morning
The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette has Episcopal Church formally warns Pittsburgh bishop over split by Ann Rodgers:
Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts-Schori of the Episcopal Church has warned Bishop Robert Duncan of Pittsburgh that he has been declared out of communion with the Episcopal Church and is danger of being removed from office if he does not abandon his efforts to realign the diocese with an Anglican province outside the United States…
The Associated Press report via PennLive.com: Episcopal Church acts against Pittsburgh bishop:
An Episcopal committee says that conservative Pittsburgh Bishop Robert Duncan has “abandoned the communion of this church” — a potential first step toward stripping him of religious authority in the denomination.
The committee blocked the national Episcopal Church from imposing the penalty of “inhibition,” which would have barred him from performing religious duties. But the Episcopal House of Bishops is expected to consider imposing the punishment near the end of this year.
Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori, who notified Duncan that he had abandoned the communion on Tuesday, told Duncan that she sought permission to inhibit him.
The Living Church has Pittsburgh Bishop Accused of Abandonment; Senior Bishops Deny Inhibition.
Religious Intelligence has Bid to depose US Bishop backfires by George Conger.
Thursday morning update
Ann Rodgers Pittsburgh Post-Gazette Removal vote nearing for Episcopal bishop
Pittsburgh Tribune-Review Bid to depose Pittsburgh bishop blocked (the Associated Press report again)
Reuters Michael Conlon Episcopal church cracks down on dissidents
Friday morning update
Church Times Pat Ashworth Consent for inhibition withheld
Updated Wednesday evening
The Bishop of Fort Worth has received another letter from the Presiding Bishop.
You can read the letter here (PDF). The full text is here below the fold.
Earlier correspondence is here.
The Living Church reports this as Bishop Iker Receives Another Letter Threatening Disciplinary Action.
Update
Bishop Iker also wrote a message to to all Clergy and Convention Delegates of the Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth. And he commented to the press on both the letter from the Presiding Bishop to him (the letter itself is included on the same page) and on the letter from the Presiding Bishop to Bishop Duncan.
January 9, 2008
The Rt. Rev Jack L. Iker, D.D.
The Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth
2900 Alameda
Fort Worth, TX 76108
Dear Jack,
Thank you for your letter. I believe you have misinterpreted my previous letter. I gave no “acknowledgement that dioceses can and do leave the Episcopal Church.” On the contrary, I continue to aver that individuals may leave, but congregations and dioceses do not. I continue to urge you to withdraw from any encouragement of such a belief, or action toward departure, as i believe it to be a violation of the vows we have both repeatedly taken to “conform to the doctrine, discipline, and worship of the Episcopal Church.”
I lament your belief that clergy and laity with your theological position are being systematically eliminated from positions of leadership and influence. If they are disappearing, it is by their own decision and at their own hands. I note how carefully the current and former Presidents of the House of Deputies have been to ensure broad representation in appointment to various church bodies, and know that my predecessors and I have also sought to include all theological positions in appointments within our purview.
You state your concern about those who would stand by their convictions being threatened with depositions and lawsuits. I would also note that depositions and lawsuits have no substance if there has been no violation. Fear of same is probably not rational if there is no basis for same.
I pray that your ministry may be one of abundance in the coming year, and I remain
Your servant in Christ,
Katharine Jefferts Schori
Updated again Wednesday evening
Episcopal News Service has announced that:
The Episcopal Church’s Title IV Review Committee has certified that Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh Bishop Robert Duncan has abandoned the communion of the church.
Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori informed Duncan on January 15 of the certification and sent him a copy.
Her letter told Duncan that she sought the canonically required permission from the House’s three senior bishops with jurisdiction to inhibit him, based on the certification, from the performance of any episcopal, ministerial or canonical acts.
“On 11 January 2008 they informed me that such consents would not be given at this time by all three bishops,” Jefferts Schori wrote.
“Pursuant to the time limits stated in Canon IV.9, the matter will not come before the House of Bishops at its next scheduled meeting in March 2008, but will come before the House at the next meeting thereafter,” the Presiding Bishop wrote in her letter.
“I would, however, welcome a statement by you within the next two months providing evidence that you once more consider yourself fully subject to the doctrine, discipline and worship of this Church,” Jefferts Schori wrote in her letter to Duncan.
The three senior bishops with jurisdiction — Leo Frade of Southeast Florida, Peter Lee of Virginia, and Don Wimberly of Texas — did give their permission on January 11 for Jefferts Schori to inhibit Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin Bishop John-David Schofield in another case where the Title IV Review Committee certified an abandonment of the communion of the church. The House will consider the case matter involving Schofield in March.
The time limit to which Jefferts Schori referred is a two-month period afforded to bishops subject to such a certification to retract their acts, demonstrate that the facts alleged in certification are false, or renounce their orders by way of Title IV, Canon 8, Sec. 2 or Title III, Canon 12, Sec. 7.
Read the full press release.
The letter from the Presiding Bishop to Bishop Duncan can be read here. (Small PDF file)
The letter from the Title IV Committee to the Presiding Bishop, starting with a cover letter, can be read here. (This is a 2Mb PDF file, with many attached documents.)
The Diocese of Pittsburgh has issued this press release:
An effort to inhibit the Rt. Rev. Robert Duncan, bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh, has not been supported by The Episcopal Church’s senior bishops.
The news, along with a copy of the allegations made by the chancellor to the Presiding Bishop against Bishop Duncan and the Title IV Review Committee’s decision to certify that, in their opinion, Bishop Duncan “had abandoned the communion of this church,” came in a letter from The Episcopal Church’s Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori late in the day on January 15.
Bishop Duncan offered a brief response to the news, saying, “Few bishops have been more loyal to the doctrine, discipline and worship of The Episcopal Church. I have not abandoned the Communion of this Church. I will continue to serve and minister as the Bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh.”
Update Wednesday afternoon
Progressive Episcopalians of Pittsburgh has issued a press release:
Progressive Episcopalians See Review Committee Action As Providing Reconciliation Opportunity. See the full text of this below the fold.
Update Wednesday evening
Episcopal News Service has a further report containing information about responses to the earlier letter: Pittsburgh’s Duncan, Progressive Episcopalians react to Review Committee’s certification.
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania — January 16, 2008 — Progressive Episcopalians of Pittsburgh (PEP) sees reason for hope in the statement issued yesterday by The Episcopal Church’s Title IV Review Committee certifying that, in its view, Bishop of Pittsburgh Robert Duncan has abandoned the communion of The Episcopal Church. PEP believes that the canonical procedures set in motion by this decision will clarify issues of polity that have become confused in this diocese.
Under Canon IV.9, the House of Bishops will, at its fall meeting or at a special meeting called earlier, give or withhold its consent for Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori to depose Bishop Duncan.
“The action of the Review Committee gives all of us in Pittsburgh serious cause to reflect,” said Dr. Joan Gundersen, President of Progressive Episcopalians of Pittsburgh. “This can be an opportunity for all of us to consider how we can change course and restore relations with one another and with The Episcopal Church.”
The Rev. Diane Shepard, First Vice President of PEP, commented, “We understand that Bishop Duncan must follow his conscience regarding the kind of church he believes is faithful to the Gospel. Whether he can resume his role in The Episcopal Church or must relinquish it, we pray that he finds a way to serve Christ’s Church in peace and good conscience.”
PEP is committed to a diocese that finds its strength in diverse understandings of Christian faith and, as our Baptismal Covenant requires, respects the dignity of every human being, ideas that exemplify The Episcopal Church at its best. “Especially now, in this time of crisis, PEP encourages all Episcopalians in the diocese to engage in dialogue about how we can move forward together. Some people may choose to leave The Episcopal Church. We hope their number will be few,” declared president Gundersen.
Today both Lambeth Palace and the Anglican Communion Office issued statements about the Diocese of Harare.
Episcopal News Service has a report by Matthew Davies Williams, Kearon condemn state disruption of Zimbabwe’s Anglican church services.
Episcopal Café has an article titled Confusion in Zimbabwe.
Ruth Gledhill has a blog article titled More on the tragedy of Zimbabwe. And on Times Online she has Churches raided in Zimbabwe for opposing disgraced bishop.
Nehanda Radio has State security moves in to help Mugabe bishop.
New Zimbabwe.com has Zimbabwe police disrupt Anglican services, priests held.
SW Radio Africa has Priests And Parishioners Arrested As Police Disrupt Church Services.
The Association of Zimbabwe Journalists in the UK has CIO called in to help Kunonga’s men take over.
Earlier, the Zimbabwe Independent had Anglicans Revoke Kunonga’s Licence.
The response of the Scottish Episcopal Church to the Draft Anglican Covenant is now available.
Covenant has an article, sparked by the Wycliffe Hall dispute, which discusses the differences between open and conservative evangelicals in England, mostly from an American perspective.
See “Open Evangelicalism”, the Wycliffe Hall Labor Dispute, and Our Theological Divide by Craig Uffman.
Updated Thursday
First Anglican Mainstream published a response to the Archbishop of Canterbury’s Advent Letter.
That response can be read here.
Then Andrew Goddard published an analysis of that response. You can read that analysis here at Fulcrum.
Update Thursday
And now here comes Michael Poon with a response to Andrew Goddard: Reaffirming our Vows and Rekindling our First Love: the Sanctification of the Anglican Communion.
The Anglican Church in Aotearoa, New Zealand and Polynesia has issued a document in response to the Draft Anglican Covenant.
First, this statement was issued by email from a PR company on behalf of Bishop Schofield:
The Episcopal Church’s assertion that Bishop Schofield has abandoned the communion of this Church is an admission that TEC rejects the historical Anglican faith which is why The Diocese of San Joaquin appealed to the Anglican Province of the Southern Cone of South America for emergency and temporary protection. The majority of the other provinces of the Anglican Communion hold to the traditional faith. It is the primary duty of bishops to guard the faith and Bp Schofield has been continually discriminated against for having done so while Bishops and Archbishops around the world have affirmed not only his stance but the move to the Southern Cone. Bishop Schofield is currently a member of both the House of Bishops of the Episcopal Church and the House of Bishops of the Southern Cone, a position not prohibited by either house. Governing documents of TEC do not prohibit relationships between different members of the Anglican Communion, rather they encourage it. TEC’s action demonstrates that there is an enormous difference between their church and most of the Anglican Communion Again, this action is a demonstrationthat TEC is walking apart from the faith and its expression of morality held by the rest of the Anglican Communion..
The Episcopal Church’s own identity is dependent upon its relationship with the whole Anglican Communion. TEC should consider whether it is imperiling that relationship by taking such punitive actions.
How is it that over 60 million Anglicans world wide can be wrong while a few hundred thousand in the American Church can claim to be right?
Note: The Diocese of San Joaquin at its annual convention on December 8, 2007 took a historic step and voted to disassociate from The Episcopal Church. The convention also accepted an invitation from Archbishop Gregory Venables and the bishops of the Province of the Southern Cone of South America to be welcomed into their membership.
Second, this clarification was issued by The Rev. Cn. Bill Gandenberger Canon to the Ordinary, Diocese of San Joaquin:
As a point of clarification, there is no confusion on the part of the Bishop of San Joaquin or the clergy, people, leadership, and convention of the Diocese of San Joaquin of their status. The claims of the Episcopal Church to have oversight or jurisdiction are not correct. The fact is that neither the Diocese nor Bishop John-David Schofield are part of The Episcopal Church. The Bishop is a member of the House of Bishops of the Southern Cone as of December 8th, 2007. The Diocese is a part of the Southern Cone. Neither the Presiding Bishop or the House of Bishops of the Episcopal Church have any further jurisdiction. Bishop Schofield is no longer a member of the House of Bishops of The Episcopal Church.
A statement from The Most Reverend Gregory Venables, dated January 11,2008:
“As of December the 8th, 2007 Bishop John-David Schofield is not under the authority or jurisdiction of The Episcopal Church or the Presiding Bishop.He is, therefore, not answerable to their national canon law but is a member of the House of Bishops of the Southern Cone and under our authority.
Un fuerte abrazo.
—The Most Rev. Greg Venables, Archbishop of the Southern Cone
Third, this statement was issued by the Bishop of Fort Worth:
It comes as no surprise that the Presiding Bishop of The Episcopal Church has initiated canonical actions against the Rt. Rev. John-David Schofield to remove him from office. However, the matter is complicated by the fact that Bishop Schofield and the Diocese of San Joaquin, by constitutional action of their Convention, are no longer a part of The Episcopal Church. They now function under the authority of the Province of the Southern Cone. Disciplinary actions cannot be taken by this Province against a Bishop who is a member of another Province of the Anglican Communion.
The House of Bishops of TEC can indeed prevent Bishop Schofield from functioning as a Bishop in congregations of The Episcopal Church. However, they cannot invalidate his consecration as a Bishop in the Church of God, nor prevent him from functioning as such in congregations that welcome and affirm his ministry as their Bishop.
The Bishop of San Joaquin has my friendship, my support, and my prayers during this time of turmoil in the life of our church.
The Rt. Rev. Jack Leo Iker
Bishop of Fort Worth
January 12, 2008
Episcopal Cafe also has an article about the confusion at Is he or isn’t he?
Note, other church-related work from the same PR company can be seen here.
In the Guardian’s column Face to Faith John Coutts argues that “Mainstream Islam stands where the churches stood in 1650 in terms of religious freedom”.
The Times has Baptism allows us to share fully in the life of Jesus by Roderick Strange.
Giles Fraser wrote in the Church Times that Theologians promoted atheism.
Ekklesia has a piece by Simon Barrow titled Rethinking religion in an open society.
Two weeks ago, the Observer had this article by Richard Harries It is possible to be moral without God.
Mary Frances Schjonberg of Episcopal News Service reports:
Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori on January 11 inhibited Diocese of San Joaquin Bishop John-David Schofield.
In the text of the inhibition, Jefferts Schori wrote: “I hereby inhibit the said Bishop Schofield and order that from and after 5:00 p.m. PST, Friday, January 11, 2008, he cease from exercising the gifts of ordination in the ordained ministry of this Church; and pursuant to Canon IV.15, I order him from and after that time to cease all ‘episcopal, ministerial, and canonical acts, except as relate to the administration of the temporal affairs of the Diocese of San Joaquin,’ until this Inhibition is terminated pursuant to Canon IV.9(2) or superseded by decision of the House of Bishops.”
Jefferts Schori acted after the Title IV Review Committee certified that Schofield had abandoned the communion of the Episcopal Church.
On January 9, Upper South Carolina Bishop Dorsey Henderson, committee chair, wrote to Jefferts Schori, telling her that the nine-member committee had met that day and that a majority agreed that the documentation provided to them “demonstrated that Bishop Schofield has abandoned the communion of this Church by an open renunciation of the Doctrine, Discipline or Worship of this Church.”
Jefferts Schori needed, in accordance with Title IV, Canon 9, Sec. 1, the consent of the three senior bishops of the church with jurisdiction (as opposed to being retired or not in diocesan seats) to issue the inhibition. She noted in the inhibition that Leo Frade of Southeast Florida, Peter Lee of Virginia, and Don Wimberly of Texas gave their consents January 11.
Read the full press release from Episcopal News Service.
Note that one of those giving his consent to this was the Bishop of Texas, Don Wimberly, convener of the “Windsor bishops”.
See the report of the Title IV Review Committee here (PDF).
See the text of the inhibition here (PDF).
And there is another ENS report on the activities of Remain Episcopal previously reported here, see San Joaquin’s remaining Episcopalians to gather for reconciliation, inclusion, celebration.
See the lengthening list of places of worship here.
Early press reports:
Associated Press Episcopal Church Bans Bishop for 2 Mos.
Rebecca Trounson Los Angeles Times Fresno bishop barred from carrying out religious duties for Episcopal Church
Bakersfield Californian San Joaquin Episcopal bishop ordered out of communion
Fresno Bee Local bishop is banned from practicing