Comments: Pittsburgh votes today

"FURTHER RESOLVED, that negotiation between any parish seeking to break its union with Convention over the matter of Provincial alignment shall be undertaken . . . consistent with the Constitutions and Canons of the Diocese, consistent with all legal obligations, and consistent with the settlement of debts and other diocesan interests related to the parish property or assets."

The above wording from the Pittsburgh resolutions accepts the concept of obligations constitutional, canonical and legal. Pittsburgh has disputed the validity of TEC's relationship and claim over Dioceses. So, when it comes to negotiation with non-consenting parishes, will they not now be setting up their new diocesan future in the very mold that they have rejected?

Furthermore, will passing this resolution prevent a parish from launching a future challenge with the new Diocese similar to Bishop Duncan's against TEC? Given this precedent, who should win such a challenge?

Posted by Cal McMillan at Saturday, 4 October 2008 at 8:02pm BST

That 'clear majority' quoted in the Pittsburgh Diocesan release wouldn't have been sufficient in the General Synod of the Church of England, voting by Houses, for agreement on a controversial issue.

Posted by penwatch at Saturday, 4 October 2008 at 9:31pm BST

No one can object to the process here - clear majorities over a long period of debate. I am glad the Bishop looks likely to resume his Episcope, but think he and they are utterly mad to be involved with Gregory Venables and the Southern Cone rump in any way. They should maybe think about setting up a structure which will more likely appeal to those who will not be able to live with the dregs of a 'Code of Practice' the CofE promised when it threw out more robust provision for 'loyal opposition' re women Bishops (in the words of KJS!!!)

Posted by Neil at Saturday, 4 October 2008 at 10:36pm BST

"No one can object to the process here - clear majorities over a long period of debate."

Funny how this kind of logic was inadmissable (to so many hierarchs of the AC) regarding the election, confirmation and consecration of the Bishop of New Hampshire.

***

Lord have mercy.
Christ have mercy.
Lord have mercy.

God bless and defend the faithful Episcopalians of Pittsburgh. May they soon receive a loyal and compassionate shepherd. Spread forth your grace in southwestern Pennsylvania, O Lord, that your children may discover the Good News in Pittsburgh Episcopal parishes---ALL of them---in your good time. Convert all our hearts, Lord Christ, that we may ever more reflect Your love. Amen.

Posted by JCF at Sunday, 5 October 2008 at 3:48am BST

"After a short meeting, the Standing Committee officially announced the diocese’s plans to elect a bishop on November 7. The election will take place during a special convention of the diocese. It is expected that Bishop Duncan will be the only candidate on the ballot."

In the light of the above announcement by the defectors from the TEC Diocese of Pittsburgh, one wonders what will be the effect on the mission of the Church Catholic in that place - now that the schismatics have declared their hand.

For former (now deposed) Bp. Duncan to go along with this charade is quite unconscionable. Also, the performance of his principal aide and abettor, Gregory Venables, Primate of the Southern Cone of South America, is equally disruptive and scornful of the rights and dignity of the Episcopal Church in America and around the world. Their contempt for due process and legitimacy of procedures is only one of the transgressions that form a sorry part of the rebellion going on within our Anglican Communion. However, out of all this, we may find that this cleansing of the Augean Stables will leave the residual, and legitimate, Diocese of Pittsburgh in a much leaner and better state in which to follow the path of Jesus in the Gospel.

I applaud and pray for the remaining parishes who have pledged loyalty to your mother Church. May God richly bless you in your struggles for justice and the inclusive nature of the Gospel.

Posted by Father Ron Smith at Sunday, 5 October 2008 at 3:57am BST

"Edith Humphrey, a member of Church of the Ascension in Oakland, Pennsylvania, and a seminary instructor [JCF: I'm going to go out on a limb, and guess nearby Trinity? a "school for schism", if ever there were one], criticized what she claimed were theological innovations in the Episcopal Church.

"Will you rest in a dying body that preaches inclusion without transformation?" she asked"

Is it possible for Ms. Humphrey (and the rest of the Duncanites) to not SLANDER the Episcopal Church, while they're busy dismembering the Body of Christ?

*Of course* TEC "preaches transformation", for each and every member. We simply don't call for people to change their God-given race, gender or sexual orientation---but simply to live as a Christian, with Christian relationships---regardless of their race, gender or sexual orientation.

Lord have mercy!

Posted by JCF at Sunday, 5 October 2008 at 4:26am BST

The majority chose Barrabas!

The loyal TEC adherents should not negotiate with the rebels, as that will make it look like they recognise this usurption.

815 should sue the Southern Cone directly.

Posted by Robert Ian Williams at Sunday, 5 October 2008 at 7:10am BST

'That 'clear majority' quoted in the Pittsburgh Diocesan release wouldn't have been sufficient in the General Synod of the Church of England, voting by Houses, for agreement on a controversial issue.'

And would the consents for Gene Robinson have been sufficient in General Synod terms for his consecration penwatch?!

Posted by Neil at Sunday, 5 October 2008 at 7:40am BST

"*Of course* TEC "preaches transformation", for each and every member. We simply don't call for people to change their God-given race, gender or sexual orientation---but simply to live as a Christian, with Christian relationships---regardless of their race, gender or sexual orientation."

Actually, she said "transformation", but she meant "conformity". It's really a common error among conservatives. I'm not sure if it's a frequently repeated slip of the tongue, actually, or if it's just another one of those words they don't know the meaning of, like "orthodox" or "love".

Posted by Ford Elms at Sunday, 5 October 2008 at 3:37pm BST

If the voter Abstained it was the same as a no vote. That was made quite clear by Wis Hays husband of Canon Mary Haggard Hays.

For me this vote will put an end to the muddle that was Pittsburgh. My hope is that the Reorganized diocese will be more accepting of all. I'm hopeful that the remaining parishes will become closer and support one another. For my parish that was very lacking. We are no the sole Episcopal Parish in the southern three county area. It will be nice to sit down with people who are more interested in building Christ vision of a more compassionate world than in people who want to run off in the night with everything that's not nailed down!!!

Posted by BobinSwPA at Monday, 6 October 2008 at 12:08am BST

neil - "would the consents for Gene Robinson have been sufficient in General Synod terms for his consecration?"

English Bishops have no need to sully their episcopal hands with 'consents' - they are appointed by HM the Queen, on the advice of her Ministers. No voting, no consents, no problem (unless you're called Jeffrey John).

In Wales, we have a much better system of an Electoral College representing the whole Province to elect a Bishop - one is taking place at this moment (for the Diocese of Bangor). A certain J John is rumoured to be amongst the candidates, but our 'closed' system means that, like a Papal Conclave, we never know the names of the losing candidates.

Posted by Richard at Wednesday, 8 October 2008 at 4:22pm BST
Post a comment









Remember personal info?






Please note that comments are limited to 400 words. Comments that are longer than 400 words will not be approved.

Cookies are used to remember your personal information between visits to the site. This information is stored on your computer and used to refill the text boxes on your next visit. Any cookie is deleted if you select 'No'. By ticking 'Yes' you agree to this use of a cookie by this site. No third-party cookies are used, and cookies are not used for analytical, advertising, or other purposes.