Long Distance Dedication ...

For God so loved the world that He gave His one and only Son,
that whoever believes in Him shall not perish but have eternal life.
John 3:16

Episcopal House of Bishops will hold hearings to remove Bishop Duncan

BB NOTE: "Bishop Jefferts Schori proposed two days of hearings to remove Bishop Robert W. Duncan of Pittsburgh permanently from the ordained ministry of The Episcopal Church for teaching that it is lawful for a diocese to withdraw from The Episcopal Church," the Living Church writes. Wow. There is so much in this assertion - the sheer authoritarian gall. I do remember being at Minneapolis after the vote was taken in the House of Bishops to affirm the Bishop of New Hampshire and the almost cultic-glee that filled the hallways. One is walking through the halls stunned by the events, and all around are people who just don't care. I also remember being in the House of Deputies in Columbus when Schori's name was announced as the new presiding bishop and the blood-curling screaming that followed. After a while, it all starts to look and feel very familiar.

I remember my mother started a Bible Study at the First Church of Christ Science (Christian Science) in Charleston, South Carolina in 1970. It was simply a Bible Study. Each Sunday before church started, the adults would meet and have a simple Bible Study. They'd read scripture and they'd talk about it and then go to the service.

Well, the Mother Church in Boston found out about it and told her to cease and desist immediately. Now that's authoritarian control - don't read, don't think, and certainly don't teach outside the strict center of control. When something threatens the authoritarian grasp for power, it must be removed - and it must be done quickly, lest anyone else start getting ideas of their own.

What this attempt by Schori and her handlers to insert an off-agenda item into the proceedings of the Episcopal House of Bishops meeting (starting this Thursday in Salt Lake City) illustrates is that they feel threatened - and they should be. By keeping it off the agenda until the last moment, they hoped to not give enough time for the opposition to organize. They think the bishops are so filled with fear and indifference that they will be like sheep and more than willing to watch one of their own taken to the slaughterhouse.

The Christian Science Mother Church was threatened by a woman doing a Bible Study, a woman who had devoutly spent her entire life in that church, as had her mother and her grandmother before her, who was diligent in bringing up her own children to follow the same Christian Science path.

What was the ultimate result of the intervention by the Mother Church? That incident led to the entire conversion of her family to re-examine Christian Science and turn to follow Jesus. After four generations in my mothers family, Christian Science came to an end. The entire family was baptized on Easter Sunday, 1975 - and those conversions continued on to include her own Christian Science mother. That intervention from Boston was the first clue for my mother that something was very very wrong in the structures of the Christian Science Church. And once that became apparent, it wasn't long before she took a long, hard look at the teaching itself.

Be careful what you wish for, Bishop Schori.

From The Living Church here.

Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori has proposed a sweeping change to the previously announced agenda for the special House of Bishops’ meeting scheduled Sept. 17-19 in Salt Lake City.

In a memorandum to bishops, Bishop Jefferts Schori proposed two days of hearings to remove Bishop Robert W. Duncan of Pittsburgh permanently from the ordained ministry of The Episcopal Church for teaching that it is lawful for a diocese to withdraw from The Episcopal Church.

The revised scheduled calls for the Presiding Bishop’s council of advice to hold an “informal evening meeting to investigate the matter” on Sept. 17, with further discussion leading to a vote during the business meeting the following day.

“At that time, the house may, by majority vote of those present, grant or withhold its consent or decline to vote until a later time,” Bishop Jefferts Schori wrote. “In that regard, some have suggested that a vote not be taken until a later meeting of the house after the forthcoming convention of the diocese in early October, when Bishop Duncan’s intentions and actions can perhaps be viewed more clearly.”

Delegates to the convention of the Diocese of Pittsburgh will not consider a final vote to realign with the Anglican Church of the Southern Cone until Oct. 4. Bishop Jefferts Schori wrote that Bishop Duncan, by “encouraging the diocese to choose to leave” The Episcopal Church, had “abandoned the communion of this church by ‘an open renunciation of the… discipline… of this church’ within the meaning of Title IV, Canon 9, Section 1(i),” Bishop Jefferts Schori said.

Bishop Jefferts Schori defended the canonical process she outlines based on precedent and expediency. She also repeatedly reminds the bishops that any member may request a ruling, and that the chair may be overruled by a two-thirds vote under the House of Bishops’ bylaws.

“I concur with my chancellor and parliamentarian that any ambiguity in the canon should be resolved in favor of making this important provision work effectively, and that the discipline of the church should not be stymied because a majority of nearly a majority of voting bishops are no longer in active episcopal positions in the church and their attendance at meetings is hampered by age, health, economics, or interest in other legitimate pursuits,” she said.

Bishop Jefferts Schori may face a challenge on the legality of introducing new business so close to the start of what she has characterized as a “special meeting” of the House of Bishops. On Aug. 20, the agenda, dates and location for the Salt Lake City meeting were given to the bishops, with no mention of a hearing into the charges brought against Bishop Duncan. The first formal declaration by the Presiding Bishop that the bishops would decide whether or not to depose the Pittsburgh bishop came on Sept 12.

Whether the vote will take place is unclear, however, as the canons specifically forbid the Presiding Bishop from amending the agenda once she issues her call for a special session to review the Lambeth Conference.

Under Robert’s Rules of Order, which are cited as the authoritative source for conducting business under the House of Bishops’ rules of order, “only business mentioned in the call of a special meeting can be transacted at such a meeting.” As the Presiding Bishop did not include the hearing on Bishop Duncan in her agenda and her “call” of the special meeting, the rules of the House of Bishops would seem to forbid her from adding it to the agenda five days before the start of the meeting.

The House of Bishops’ rules also require 30 days notice. Rule XIX states, “except by a two-thirds vote of those present and voting, no member of the house may introduce a resolution at a special meeting unless the resolution has been circulated 30 days in advance to the members.”

Bishop Duncan said previously he will not be present for a hearing. For the deposition hearing and vote to be blocked, a point of order must be raised and seconded. Bishop Schori would then be asked to rule on whether her actions constitute a breach of order. If she rules against the appeal, it would require a two-thirds vote of the house to overrule her.

(The Rev.) George Conger and Steve Waring

LIVE from Trinity School for Ministry

BACK TO OUR REGULARLY SCHEDULED PROGRAMING ...

Be a Seminarian for the Day - at Trinity School for Ministry, the seminary located in the Diocese of Pittsburgh, 8:30 a.m.-4:00 p.m.

Letting Go: How blended-worship builds community

A few years ago I was visiting Holy Trinity Brompton in London for a conference. The worship that they do there on Sunday nights is one of the best experiences of worship I have known. I always look forward to attending those Sunday night services whenever I can when I am in London. They are contemporary and hip and cool and Spirit-filled, the praise songs are new and scripturally-based, the talk is also based on scripture but with applications for our life today. I have subscribed to HTB's iTunes podcast so I can continue to listen to the talks from that great community in the heart of London. It is worth the plane trip just for one service.

I've always preferred since leaving Christian Science "contemporary" worship. It was through very laid back contemporary worship in a coffee house in San Diego that I became a Christian. It has always been my "preferred" worship "style" - it's personal, it's joyful, it's collaborative, it's fun, and I can take it home with me.

But of course, I'd become an Episcopalian - and that came with liturgy. In the early years as a college student attending my first Episcopal church, I didn't know where the liturgy came from. I didn't know about the Prayer Book, in fact, I thought John Howe, the rector of Truro then, wrote them as he prepared his sermons. It took several more years until I found out they were all in a book that was written centuries ago and I was so disappointed! How could old liturgy be fresh for today?

During that particular visit at HTB in London, I did not have the chance to go to the Sunday night services because I had to catch a plane home. So I decided I'd go to the early Eucharist service (yes, they had one then!) at 7:30 in the morning. It was a straightforward service, the organist was there and we sang traditional hymns and there was a short sermon, delivered by Nicky Gumbel in a blue suit. He'd dressed up, because normally we didn't see him in a suit at all, but in a blue or white shirt and no tie. And certainly no collar.

However, when it came time to celebrate the Eucharist, he went behind the table in his blue suit and began the liturgy and I nearly jumped out of my chair - not in charismatic enthusiasm, mind you - but in outrage. Now wait just a doggone minute, I was shocked to find myself thinking. At least you could put on a stole, Nicky. Poor Nicky - I did realize he was wearing a suit - that was his liturgical vestments. But I had expectations that until that moment, I had no idea I now had. Something had apparently changed.

In that moment, as the Eucharist continued, I was dumbfounded. What had happened to me? Why should I care - when I had never cared - whether he put on a stole when he went behind the table? What was happening to me?

When did I become an Episcopalian?

That incident revealed that something indeed had happened - that through my exposure over the years to liturgy and excellence in traditional forms of worship, I had come to appreciate other forms of worship, that they had meaning. While I may still prefer the informality of a Sunday night service at HTB, I had come to respect the blended worship style we used at Truro, especially when it came to liturgy. In fact, blending worship styles together had become an artform in itself and to do it well was to see the liturgy come alive.

But something else happened along the way. In appreciating the different worship styles and discovering ways in which all the styles can work together in the same service, I also discovered that this opened up my life to all kinds of people that I never expected to care about so very much. By embracing the worships styles and blending them together - all founded and grounded in scripture and the historic understanding of the Book of Common Prayer - my whole world opened up.

Community was born.

So instead of catering worship services toward a particular style (and their enthusiasts), at Truro we aimed at excellence in worship that drew from all the styles - from the magnificent organ compositions of Bach, to the transcendent hymns of Charles Wesley, to the mission-minded songs by the Newsboys or Casting Crowns - it went on and on.

The first key was finding the finest scripturally-based compositions and offer them in worship with excellence, not as a performance, but as worship.

The second key was to discern how to blend it all together in one service. That took discernment and wisdom and the ability to risk.

All kinds of assumptions are made before we even begin - and we don't know those assumptions until we begin. I had no idea that I'd freak out over a stole until it happened and I was stunned by my reaction. I had always been the one that wanted to get rid of vestments and pews as barriers to evangelism - what had happened?

I had come into relationship with those who had taught me the value in worship of some of those traditions. My world opened up. Through the guidance of the Holy Spirit - and through trial and error as well - we learned how to balance the informality of personal devotion with the grandeur of corporate celebration. Every week is an experiment - every week there is a possibility of failure. But that kind of risk produces an unexpected return.

I remember one time I was visiting Ascension and Saint Agnes on Massachusetts Avenue in Washington on a Sunday morning. It's affectionately known as "Smokey Aggie." It's the "highest" worship I have ever known. At this particular service, the priest went to the Holy Table (fully vested - extremely vested) and then, with his back to the congregation, continued with the service.

Again, I nearly jumped out of my pew. Now wait just a doggone minute, I thought again. Haven't we heard of the Reformation? What is he doing with his back to the congregation as though he is in Rome? Why doesn't he turn around. We're over here. What would the reformers say? I folded my arms.

So after the service I was complaining to a friend who knows a thing or two about high church worship. I was going on and on, how dare he, hadn't he heard of the Reformation, how could he turn his back on the congregation, blah, blah blah.

My friend smiled and replied, "Ah, he was facing the East."

Silence.

The East?

The East is the place of Resurrection.

Churches are built to face the East.

We wait in expectation for His return.

When Christ returns He will come from the East.

I even remembered the line in Lord of the Rings, "Look to my coming, at first light, on the fifth day. At dawn, look to the East."

Come, Lord Jesus, Come - we pray at the close of the Book of Revelation.

And we live ready for His return, the focus of the Eucharist.

Again, I was dumbfounded. The priest was illustrating to us all that as a community we await with expectation for Christ's return, when every knee shall bow, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord. His act was totally centered on Jesus, which warmed the heart of this evangelical. I was repentant.

As I began to learn (sometimes the hard way) - that once we clear the hurdle of our expectations, our own presumptions - and lay those down (and that can take some time, often through worship and prayer) we begin not only to open our hearts and minds with new expectations toward the Lord and His transforming work in our lives, but also, perhaps surprisingly, to one another.

Now it's not "my style" or "my service" or "my prayer book" or "my guitar" or "my pipe organ" or "my drums" - it's asking how do we fit all those things together in a service of praise? How do we fit ourselves together as a Church?

And it can fit - you can blend the simplicity of an informal gathering of contemporary music with the expressive liturgy from the prayer book. Some parts lean toward certain types of music better than others - that takes discernment, wisdom, experience, and a willingness to fail.

As we do this week by week, it has an enormous impact on the congregation. I saw an illustration of this recently when I found some old video tapes from when Martyn Minns was installed as rector of Truro in 1992.

At his installation, his Sunday night worship team from his former parish, All Angels in Manhattan, came down from New York to Virginia to present some worship offerings. Truro at that time had a blend of a piano, a guitar, some classical instruments, the old organ, and a robed choir. We had come out of the renewal movement and so the songs were both hymns and praise music. We thought we were pretty cool.

Then the All Angels worship team came out to do the offertory.

The team was made up of a blend of Sunday morning young adults and members of the Sunday night homeless congregation. They sang gospel and completely brought down the service - or was that, bought it up. We had never had such a display of street-wise gospel in my memory. We were a nice suburban church, thank you very much. Between the stunned and the thrilled, the church nearly popped its roof off to Richmond. Even Bishop Lee got into it.

And something stuck. It wasn't long before Horace Boyer came and retaught the choir how do excellent gospel - we had to learn and he patiently taught us over several years. We learned that there is a whole method to it and much of it meant letting go, singing well, but letting go. It was technically as complicated as any classical composition put in front of us, but it was as expressive as any contemporary praise song. It was an attitude. It came from the heart. It broke open the church.

Now gospel is a staple at this church on Main Street in Fairfax. It got us ready for the future in more ways than we could ever have imagined.

So now we blended traditional processional hymns with the organ and the robed choir, contemporary compositions that are focused on our evangelical mission and inner healing, and gospel that called us to radical transformation, not only of ourselves and our church, but of our world.

And what happened - the pews began to fill with people from all walks of life, and became not just racially diverse, but perhaps even more surprisingly - ethnically diverse. As more and more nationalities filled our pews, they brought their own worship styles with them that were often integrated into the worship of the church. When Truro members went on mission, they brought back the songs and styles of where they went and this was also often incorporated into the worship on Sunday morning.

The focus was not on performance - always a temptation - but as an offering of the most excellent worship possible, one that came from the heart and through practice and preparation assisted in enabling the entire congregation to worship. The foundation was orthodox Christianity as expressed in historic Anglicanism. We didn't change the theology, we blended the styles. And our eyes were opened to a whole new world.

And through it all - as we let go of the glories of the past, we open our hearts not only to the Lord and all He has for us and all we have for Him, but we also open our hearts to one another. Our challenge is making room not only for God to work in our own lives, but perhaps most especially to make room for Him to work through one other as well. This happens in worship.

In order to sing, we need to blend. And in order to blend, we need to listen. And in order to listen, we need to care. And in order to care, we need to let go. That's joy.

Legal doubt over Presiding Bishop's move to depose the Bishop of Pittsburgh

George Conger has the scoop from here.

Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori may face legal hurdles in her bid to depose Pittsburgh Bishop Robert Duncan this week, as her decision to change the agenda of the special session of the House of Bishops five days before its start appears to violate canon law.

On Sept 12, Bishop Schori distributed a memorandum to the American bishops announcing that on Sept 18 she would attempt to depose the conservative leader.

“I shall present to the House the matter of the certification to me by the Title IV Review Committee that Bishop Robert W Duncan has abandoned the Communion of this Church within the meaning of Canon IV.9,” she wrote.

However, the rules of the House of Bishops forbid modifying the agenda of a special session after the meeting has been announced, placing her plans in legal and canonical limbo. Whether the bishops will challenge her request is unclear, however, as her past legal missteps in the cases of Bishops John-David Schofield and Williams Cox provoked protests from bishops and dioceses distressed over what they perceived was her abuse of office, but no action followed.

On Aug 20 Bishop Schori wrote to the bishops stating “as discussed in our spring meeting and confirmed in our time at Lambeth, we will hold a special meeting of the House of Bishops September 17-19 in Salt Lake City, Utah.” “The main purpose of this meeting,” Bishop Schori wrote, “will be to reflect and deliberate together following the Lambeth Conference.”

In the schedule appended to the letter, two sessions are labelled “Lambeth de-brief”, two “Business meeting”, and one “Theological Education.” No mention is made of Bishop Duncan or any disciplinary action in the formal letter calling the special session.

Following the release of the Presiding Bishop’s letter, a number of bishops contacted her to ascertain whether or not rumours that Bishop Duncan would be brought up on charges before the session were true.

Central Florida Bishop John W Howe wrote to the Presiding Bishop on Aug 26 stating there was a widespread expectation that charges of abandonment of Communion might be brought. The Presiding Bishop’s formal call of a special session however, made “no mention of that,” he told his diocesan board last week.

The evangelical leader added that bringing Bishop Duncan up on charges at this time “would be entirely out of order” as the Presiding Bishop had not completed all the mandated steps leading to the hearing.

Were the matter brought to a vote, Bishop Howe said on Sep 11 he would “dissociate from it,” neither voting yes or no as the underlying proceeding was improper.

Bishop Duncan wrote to the bishops on Aug 24, stating he would not be attending the meeting. “Given that I have been judged guilty by the Title IV disciplinary committee (without even my knowledge, prior to their findings, that there had been charges brought against me), and given the determination of the Presiding Bishop and her chancellor to proceed in this direction… I cannot see a way to bring myself to be present at the coming meeting of the House.

“In light of all that has happened so far, what kind of ‘hearing’ can I expect the leadership to accord me?” Bishop Duncan stated.

A spokesman for the Diocese of Pittsburgh told ReligiousIntelligence.com last week that they had had no response from the Presiding Bishop to the Aug 24 letter and did not know if Bishop Duncan would be brought up on charges at the meeting or not.

Neva Rae Fox, program officer for public affairs at the Episcopal Church Center, on Aug 21 told the Living Church magazine said she was not aware of any plans for disciplinary action during the special session.

In her Sept 12 letter announcing the change to the agenda, the Presiding Bishop defended her interpretation of the canons that allowed her to proceed and detailed the charges. Bishop Duncan’s verbal encouragement to his diocesan synod to alter its constitution, permitting it to withdraw from the Episcopal Church was prima facie evidence of his having ‘abandoned the Communion.’

She added that prior to the hearing, the Presiding Bishop’s Council of Advice would “hold an informal evening meeting to ‘investigate the matter’.”

“While Bishop Duncan has unfortunately announced that he will not attend this meeting of the House, his supporters may at this hearing offer factual and opinion material as to why he has not abandoned the Communion of the Church,” she wrote.

Bishop Schori also stated she would reject readings of church law that did not conform to her own, adding that “any ambiguity in the canon” should be resolved in her favour.

Plans for the September special session of the House of Bishops were announced in a March 25 e-mail from the Presiding Bishop. “The main purpose of this meeting will be to reflect and deliberate together following the Lambeth Conference,” she stated.

The Presiding Bishop added “concerning the issue of Bishop Duncan, all relevant materials have been posted on the College of Bishops website, including the Review Committee's certification and the two submissions the Committee reviewed.”

“We had mentioned the possibility of a one-day May meeting,” the Presiding Bishop wrote, but was “not sure there was adequate desire for it on the part of the House at this point, and so this will be determined after a poll in April.

“More detailed information about the agenda, registration fee, and location of the September meeting will arrive in a future mailing to help you prepare for our time together,” Bishop Schori wrote.

On April 8, the Presiding Bishop’s assistant sent an e-mail asking the bishops if they wanted to hold a special session in May. No agenda was offered, but the September meeting was tentatively scheduled for Salt Lake City. “Details about that meeting will be sent out in a later communication,” Canon Charles Robertson wrote.

Ten days later, Canon Robertson informed the bishops that there was not sufficient interest in holding a May meeting, but confirmed “we will indeed proceed as planned with the post-Lambeth meeting in September in Salt Lake City.”

Two meetings of the House of Bishops were held at the Lambeth Conference. However, they were styled as a meeting of the bishops of the Episcopal Church, not meetings of the House of Bishops, as the Bishop of New Hampshire, the Rt Rev Gene Robinson was forbidden to attend the gatherings by conference organizers. The Salt Lake City meeting was discussed briefly by the American bishops at Lambeth as a time to “reflect” on the July 16 to Aug 4 conference, but no mention of a hearing to depose Bishop Duncan was made.

On Aug 20 the agenda, dates and location for the September Salt Lake City meeting were formally given to the bishops, with no mention of a hearing into the charges brought against Bishop Duncan. The first formal declaration by the Presiding Bishop that the bishops would decide whether or not to depose the Pittsburgh bishop came on Sept 12.

Bishop Duncan responded on Sept 13 in a letter to his diocese stating the decision to depose him from office this week was a bid by the Presiding Bishop to squelch the planned October vote by the diocesan synod to withdraw from the Episcopal Church and move under the protection of the Province of the Southern Cone. Bishop Duncan added the “House of Bishops ‘vote’ will be a gross violation of the Constitution and Canons of the Episcopal Church” and he asked the diocese “not be intimidated or turned from our over-riding commitment.”

A Pittsburgh spokesman told ReligiousIntelligence.com that Bishop Schori’s plans to move against Bishop Duncan violated the basic norms of “fair play.”

Giving five days notice that the lawfully elected bishop of a diocese would stand trial for what he might do, rather than what he had done, was “unfair” to both the diocese and to Bishop Duncan, diocesan communications officer Peter Frank said.

Whether the vote will take place is unclear, however, as the canons specifically forbid the Presiding Bishop from amending the agenda once she issued her March 25 and Aug 20 call for a special session to review the Lambeth Conference.

The Rules of Order for the House of Bishops state that “the latest edition of Robert's Rules of Order shall govern the interpretation of these rules, and the parliamentary procedures to be followed in this House.”

Under Roberts Rules of Order, “only business mentioned in the call of a special meeting can be transacted at such a meeting.” As the Presiding Bishop did not include the Duncan hearing in her Aug 20 agenda and her “call” of the special meeting, the rules of the House of Bishops forbid her to add it to the agenda five days before the start of the meeting.

The House of Bishops rules also require 30 days notice. Rule XIX states, “except by a two-thirds vote of those present and voting, no member of the House may introduce a Resolution at a special meeting unless the Resolution has been circulated thirty days in advance to the members.”

Bishop Duncan will not be present, as will a number of other conservative bishops, to challenge the Presiding Bishop. For the vote to be blocked, a point of order must be raised and seconded. Bishop Schori will be asked to rule whether her actions constitute a breach of order. If she rules against the protesting bishops, an appeal may be taken which requires a majority or tie vote to sustain her ruling.

What is the difference between a Kangaroo Court and the upcoming Episcopal House of Bishops Meeting in Utah?

Apparently, nothing.

UPDATE: Anglican Curmudgeon blows it all out of the water here.

I keep wondering if there are those American bishops out there who love liberty and justice for all and who recognize the intentions to walk away from those ideals at the next meeting of the Episcopal House of Bishops in Salt Lake City, Utah. Are there bishops out there who are not blind to the ramifications of the hatched up plan to charge the Bishop of Pittsburgh with what amounts to be an ecclesiastical accusation of sedition? Will they remain silent or will they speak? Just how deep does their love of justice go?

Does it go only as deep as the insiders-wink of an ally?

Do they really believe in free speech? Do they really believe in freedom of assembly? Is this outburst of accusing opponents for their lack of suitable loyalty sound remarkably like other examples in history when a minority comes up before the majority in opposition? Instead of robustly making the case to the people, they draw the shades and charge opponents with sedition. Rather than sending their opponents to the gallows, they will chop up their collars and send them into exile. There is no Anglican Communion. There is only the Episcopal Communion and if you dare speak out against such a development, then, well, it's all over now.

It's been a long, long time since the United States charged one of its own citizens with acts of sedition. Guess the Episcopal Church has forgotten that justice is not just expecting everyone to agree with you. Civility isn't civil when it accounts to forcing everyone to agree, when it punishes those who disagree and removes leaders when the laity begin to catch on and use the power of the ballot box. Unable to punish the laity (the court rejected their attempts to sue the laity) Katharine Jefferts Schori turns her sights on creating a scapegoat all our own.

But as Bishop Duncan points out, it is his Diocesan Convention that makes the decision - to charge him ahead of time is to charge him with what are basically acts of sedition. Just exactly what do Episcopal bishops believe freedom and liberty mean? What does conscience mean? And has Schori's and her lawyers redefined the canons to mean that the Episcopal Church is now the Episcopal Communion?

Is this how dissent is handled, through draconian actions such as these now planned by Katharine Jefferts Schori and her lawyers and those bishops that elected her?

All we know is that kangaroos belong in Australia, not in Utah.

Not Dark Yet ... Episcopal Presiding Bishop stands against Episcopal civility and polity in threat to remove the Bishop of Pittsburgh

It's not dark yet, but it's getting there.

BB NOTE: This is still America, right?

The Rt. Rev. Bob Duncan, elected by the Diocese of Pittsburgh, and serving that diocese faithfully for eleven years, is targeted by Katharine Jefferts Schori with the threat that he has abandoned the so-called "Communion of the Church" and will be stripped of his ordination and consecration authority.

In order to go forward with this threat, they must maintain that she and the majority of the other Episcopal bishops are convinced that the Episcopal Church is and will continue to be "the" Communion (not the Anglican Communion, but the Episcopal Communion) which should alarm the Archbishop of Canterbury (now we see why Schori stood with her arms folded during the standing ovation for Rowan Williams after his final presidential address). As we know, Schori was unable to convince the majority of the senior bishops to go forward with this action. She did not have the votes to inhibit Bishop Duncan back in January. So, she (with a little help from her friends) came up with Plan B.

Ignoring the counsel of Bishop Peter James Lee and Bishop Don Wimberly, she intends to use the same revisonist methods regarding the Episcopal Church constitution and canons as she uses on scripture (and her lawyers keep attempting to do in court). The canons, the law, the scripture mean what ever she wants them to mean - whatever it will do to get what she wants. Negotiation is not an option.

UPDATE: Case in point, her "reinterpretation" of asking for consent from the three senior bishops. Again, if you don't get what you want, reinterpret it to mean what you want. From the Schori Screed:

At this meeting there may be raised the question whether, under Canon IV.9, the House may proceed to grant or withhold its consent to Bishop Duncan's deposition on the ground that the three senior bishops have not consented to his inhibition. It is the position of my Chancellor, after reviewing the apparent intent of the canon and consulting several other chancellors and former chancellors, as well as the opinion of the Parliamentarian of the House, that the General Convention in enacting this canon did not intend to give the three senior bishops a "veto" over the House's right to determine whether or not a bishop who has been certified by the Review Committee as having abandoned the Communion of this Church should be deposed. Rather, that decision was intended to be made by the House. The consent of the three senior bishops, they opine, was intended to be sought only on the matter of whether or not the bishop in question should be inhibited pending the proceeding before the House, and that any ambiguity in the language of the canon should be resolved in favor of the ability of the House itself to vote on this matter. In their view, and in the language of the canon, it is my "duty ... to present the matter to the House of Bishops" regardless of whether the bishop in question has been inhibited.

Oh there's more - way more - but we'll comment on that later.

The call for civility now rings hallow from the highest rafters. Standing with arms folded while the Anglican bishops give a rousing ovation to the Archbishop of Canterbury while your fellow American bishops walk out in protest, oh yeah, that's really civil. How funny that their op-ed was release a few days before civility will be blown up entirely. Again, another indication that 815 is employing pre-HOB meetings public relations maneuvers by planting editorials in the Washington Post.

Here is the letter to the people of the Diocese of Pittsburgh from Bishop Duncan.

In a letter to the House of Bishops yesterday, Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori made it clear that there will be a vote this coming Thursday on whether to depose me from the ministry of the Episcopal Church. The charge is abandonment of the Communion of the Church, a charge initiated by five priests and sixteen laypeople of the Diocese of Pittsburgh. Much of the “evidence” in the case is put forward by the House of Bishops Property Task Force, drawn directly from the Calvary litigation. We have long suspected that a principal purpose in the Calvary litigation was to have me removed, by whatever means, before the realignment vote. Whatever the purported evidence, I continue to maintain that the House of Bishops “vote” will be a gross violation of the Constitution and Canons of the Episcopal Church.

There are two things I would say, and one thing I would ask.

First, whatever happens on Thursday as to my status, the Diocese will carry forward under rules long-ago established. If I am “removed,” the Standing Committee will be the Ecclesiastical Authority. Together with all the leadership presently in place, both appointed and elected, the Standing Committee will carry us through to our October 4th Annual Convention and beyond. We as a Diocese will not be intimidated or turned from our over-riding commitment, which is faithfulness to our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ within the mainstream of Anglicanism.

Second, I want to share with you the text of a letter I wrote to the entire House of Bishops on August 24th. It addresses my situation as yet one more manifestation of the moral collapse of the Episcopal Church in recent years. Whatever is decided on Thursday, this is a tragic moment for the Episcopal Church.

Third, I ask you to pray, to pray for me, for Nara, for all our leaders, for our Diocese and, above all, for whatever will best serve our Lord’s purposes. Today is the eleventh anniversary of my “seating” as diocesan bishop. No one could have imagined that we (or I) would be facing this unprecedented trial without a trial. But at the beginning I asked you all to pray. You said you would. As a result, God has done remarkable things with and through us all. So fear not. It is confidence in our faithful God that will carry us all through to a better day, to the other side of the vote on September 18th and the other side of votes on October 4th. I expect that God will still grant me many years of service to the people and the place I have come to love so much.

“[Because of the storm] they were frightened. But Jesus said to them: ‘It is I; do not be afraid.’” [John 6:19b-20]

Faithfully in Christ,

+Bob Pittsburgh

Here's the letter Bishop Bob Duncan wrote to the House of Bishops on August 24.

Thanks to the Intrepid Greg, you can read the entire Schori flame-out here.

Hurricane Ike Watch

Ike is near landfall. You can watch the track of the storm here.

UPDATE: Below, you can listen to the latest podcast from the National Hurricane center:



It's sort of odd that the coverage for this even more powerful - and perhaps historical - storm is so much less than for the last two less hurricanes. Maybe the networks have used up the annual Hurricane budget - or we're suffering from a form of Hurricane Fatigue. There's a good liveblog on the hurricane here.

Of course, we're also remembering that one of the most devastating natural disasters of all time was the Galveston Hurricane of 1900 which you can read about here. I grew up hearing it called the Galveston Flood, perhaps back when hurricanes were seen more for their floods than their winds.

Tonight we received this from a dear long-time friend who lives just outside of Houston:

Lots of wind so far but no rain in our area. We are northwest of the city and under a severe tornado watch.

So we're lifting up prayers for those who are in harm's way, for wisdom and strength to the first responders who are working so hard tonight, and for those who have fled the storm - that God will give them peace.

Thinking in particular of our dear friends down there in Houston, we offer this:



LATE NIGHT UPDATE: You can watch several Houston-area television stations all together on a single page here. Pick which screen and turn down the volume of the others. Some are now off the air.

Yeah, only in America:



All we can say is we hope the bear caught a ride north or he is certainly high-fiving it with Jesus by now.

SATURDAY:



UPDATE: Here's a montage from the Weather Channel. The Bear even makes a cameo:

Dissing Full Inclusion for Civility

The Washington Post has it here. An interesting placement of an op-ed designed to "respond" to the Os Guinness op-ed last May. This op-ed is brought to us by mega-bucks Trinity Wall Street (which, incidentally, refused to help bail the Lambeth Conference out of debt, even though it supplied all the "videos" shown daily to the bishops - oops). Wonder if there is not some push-back underway now from the financially-inclined sections of TEC, especially based in Manhattan. Inclusion is nice, but cash is better.

It would all be so much nicer if there wasn't all this full inclusion and icky Bible talk. It just ruins the golf game and those lovely investments.

Archbishop of Canada sinks his own ship

BB NOTE: Looks like the Archbishop of the Anglican Church in Canada has taken a maneuver out of the Bishop of San Diego's playbook. Take private conversations public and by doing so, sink it. It's a very, very old political tactic - when you want to sabotage a strategic plan - or perhaps pretend to have a plan when you are actually against it ("I was for the plan before I was against it") - leak the whole thing to the press and sink it. Brilliant.

Note what the Archbishop of the Southern Cone says about it:

“We had been talking about a private meeting, and it rather surprises me that it is now public. This makes it even more difficult for me to attend,” said Gregory Venables, Anglican Primate of the Southern Cone. Exactly! The Archbishop of Canada does NOT want talks so he leaks it to the press - and guess who gets blamed?

Looks like the Archbishop of Canada is out pretending to sail a ship called Showdown, when in fact, he's all ready sunk it.

Remember, loose lips sink ships. And that's just how he likes it.

From Religious Intelligence here, Toby Cohen reporting.

SHOWDOWN has been requested by the head of the Anglican Church of Canada with other bishops over cross-province interference.

he primate of the Canadian Church, the Most Rev Fred Hiltz, has asked the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, to host a face-to-face meeting with the Primate of the Anglican Province of the Southern Cone, the Most Rev Gregory Venables, Episcopal Church Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori and Episcopal Anglican Church of Brazil Archbishop, the Most Rev Mauricio de Andrade.

Archbishop Venables claimed jurisdiction over 10 Canadian congregations this year following fractures in the Canadian Church over same-sex marriage blessings. US and Brazilian churches have also turned to the Southern Cone.

This has been deemed wholly inappropriate by Archbishop Hiltz, who argues that bishops can not claim jurisdiction over congregations in another part of the worldwide communion.

Following the Lambeth Conference, a moratorium on such arrangements was asked for by the Communion, to balance the request for a moratorium on appointing homosexuals to the episcopate. Canadian bishops are scheduled to meet next month to consider their reaction to Lambeth’s request.

Archbishop Hiltz said he wants a chance for both sides to listen to each other properly. Describing what he would say to Archbishop Venables, he said: “Let me try and hear why it is you feel you need to continue to work to intervene in the life of the Anglican Church of Canada.”

The Southern Cone has about 22,000 members and encompasses Argentina, Bolivia, Chile, Paraguay, Peru and Uruguay. Its provincial synod, meeting in Valpariso, Chile, November 5-7, 2007, agreed to welcome into the province “on an emergency and pastoral basis” Episcopal Church dioceses “taking appropriate action to separate from the Episcopal Church.”

Archbishop Venables now finds himself in a difficult position. He said: “We had been talking about a private meeting, and it rather surprises me that it is now public. This makes it even more difficult for me to attend.” He will shortly make a formal response about the proposed meeting to Dr Williams.

On the Eve of 9/11

We're taking a time out from business as usual for the next twenty-four hours.

Tuesday Night at the Cafe: Alison Krauss and Yo Yo Ma

Potter Watch: Court issues a ruling

Litigation here, litigation there, litigation everywhere. You can read about the ruling over at Shell Cottage. Hope Jo's writing that book.

For some reason, this poem by William Carlos Williams comes to mind:

The Red Wheelbarrow
by William Carlos Williams

so much depends
upon

a red wheel
barrow

glazed with rain
water

beside the white
chickens.

Liberal congregation takes Diocese of Pittsburgh to court prior to historic vote

UPDATED! See below.

Bishop Robert Duncan has released a statement on the results of a hearing before Judge James that took place on September 8. From here.

The statement follows:

"On Sept. 8, there was a hearing before Judge James in the Calvary litigation. Calvary took the position that the Realignment vote will violate the 2005 Stipulation and that Calvary was entitled to the appointment of a "monitor" to take over the financial affairs of the Diocese. Calvary first initiated this request in a July 2008 filing. Since July, we have documented with the Court the Diocese's strong opposition to Calvary's position, and the fact that Diocese has consistently complied with the Stipulation since it was signed, and will continue to comply with the Stipulation after the Realignment vote. The Diocese always has been, and remains committed to administering Diocesan assets for the beneficial use of all parishes and institutions of the Diocese, regardless of any parish's position on Realignment.

"The relief Calvary sought -- a court-appointed monitor who would effectively run the financial affairs of the Diocese -- was not what was done yesterday. To the contrary, we proposed the appointment of an independent third-party (called a "Special Master"), who will have no role regarding the operation of the Diocese. Rather, the Special Master will review all Diocesan financial records and make recommendations to the Court regarding which property is covered by which provisions in the 2005 Stipulation (i.e., what is Diocesan property and what is parish property). The appointment of a Special Master has no impact on whether TEC or its representatives can make any claim to any property. These issues will be addressed at a later date. We have clearly stated our position that the minority who oppose Realignment are not entitled to seize the assets of the Diocese. If necessary, we will vigorously pursue this position in litigation.

"It is important at this juncture, however, to be mindful of the destructive effect of the all-or-nothing approach to property disputes that has characterized so much of the church property litigation across the country. Judge James has voiced his concern that all members of our Church -- regardless of where they stand on Realignment -- should be permitted to worship as they deem appropriate. Before the conclusion of yesterday's hearing, Judge James asked counsel for both parties to confirm that nothing about the appointment of a Special Master, or the establishment of an escrow account, would negatively impact any parish's ability to continue worshiping as that parish chooses to worship.

"We think appointment of the Special Master is an excellent way to begin the process of pursuing a fair and equitable distribution of property. To repeat, this process does not determine how property will be divided, it simply identifies the property at issue so the Court has a clear picture of what property is in dispute. We will continue to seek the Court's assistance to work through these issues to maximize our opportunity to avoid a destructive (and expensive) all-or-nothing battle."

The Coalition for Realignment has released the following statement:

The Coalition for Realignment was pleased and greatly encouraged with the outcome of the recent hearing on the Calvary litigation that occurred on September 8th in a hearing before Judge James. Judge James not only responded negatively to Calvary's most recent requests, but adopted the strong recommendation of the Diocese of Pittsburgh for the appointment of an independent 'Special Master'. The Special Master will be a neutral party who will be able to review financial records and property matters dispassionately. We expect that this review and the recommendations the Special Master will make to the court, will greatly assist us in identifying options for shaping fair and equitable distribution of property.

In agreement with our diocesan leadership, the Coalition for Realignment strongly supports an even handed way forward with regard to property, over against an all-or-nothing approach to property disputes. We believe that open-hearted negotiations are the right way forward and most likely to glorify God. We continue to be supportive of all efforts that will move us away from the scandal of unnecessary and costly litigation between Christians.

The Coalition was also greatly encouraged by the wisdom of Judge James who voiced his strong opinion that parishes on both sides of the realignment issue should be able to continue to worship as they so choose. The Diocese of Pittsburgh had a very good day in court! The statement from Bishop Robert Duncan of the Diocese of Pittsburgh is below.

Jonathan Millard (Spokesperson) and Geoff Chapman (Convener)
Coalition for Realignment
http:.//www.re-align.org

Very interesting ...

Steve Wood of St. Andrew's Mt. Pleasant, S.C. has been "invited" to have dinner with the Presiding Bishop. “Outlined was an afternoon of discussion with some of my colleagues from the some of the largest congregations in The Episcopal Church, followed by a reception and dinner at her (the PB’s) residence,” Steve was told. But no word on the agenda topics.

Prayers for Steve for safe travel. Read more about it here.

What happened to you, Bishop James Jones of Liverpool?

It was the Diocese of Virginia's fault?

From here.

The Bishop of Liverpool, James Jones "now regrets having written a letter opposing Jeffrey John’s consecration. He opposes the Windsor process, which is designed to tie down Anglican teaching more securely to Scripture. He evidently sees no problem with continued communion with the American episcopal church, and distances himself from the view that homosexual intercourse is a sin like adultery. All these remarks indicate a marked shift in his views; and the bishop seems, subsequently, to have made no effort to disabuse the Guardian readers.

What has led him to this change of heart? He ascribes it to the dialogue between the diocese of Liverpool and the dioceses of Virginia in the USA and Akure in Nigeria. He says he now sees the African rejection of homosexuality as determined by their context and the American acceptance of homosexuality as determined by theirs. Nigerians oppose homosexual activity because it is illegal and disapproved by Muslims. African Christians do not want to be seen by Muslims as taking the path of Western moral decadence. American Episcopalians however see the question of homosexual rights as a question of civil rights. They do not want their generation to be accused of discriminating against homosexuals as their ancestors discriminated against slaves and blacks."

Liverpool was one of the major ports that brought slaves to North America, including Virginia. The slave ships originated in Liverpool. There are no words that can accurately describe what those men and women and children went through on those slave ships, what suffering they endured when they were enslaved against their will for generation after generation in a country that dreamed of liberty. It is a stain on the history of both our countries. We are not healed from those years. We merely survive them.

The audacity, then, to draw a parallel to the horrific suffering those men and women and children endured because they were black to those who engage in behavior that is contrary to the overwhelming majority of Christian biblical teaching worldwide (including in Africa itself) is to, in fact, trivialize what happened to the millions trapped in slavery, to trivialize those ships that left Liverpool for America.

There is simply no comparison. It is outrageous. African Americans in this country - many of them liberal in their politics, but conservative in their religion - oppose the use of their history as a mantra for gay rights. Just how much research did James Jones do when he was in Virginia anyway?

We have a human will, we have choice over our behaviors - we may not like it, we may throw temper tantrums and our toys, but we still have choice.

We have no choice as the color of our skin. We have no choice when we are taken against our will, locked in chains, and sold as property, generation after generation after generation.

That James Jones points to the Diocese of Virginia as to why he's abandoned his biblical principles is not only tragic, it is unconscionable. How can he be in Liverpool and forget? How can we be in Virginia and not remember?

Next time, Bishop Jones, why don't you go on down to Sullivan's Island in South Carolina and take a Sunday afternoon stroll along Fort Moultrie. That's where your Liverpool ships landed, where more than 200,000 men, women, and children - the ones that survived the horrific journey - were taken from the ships and sold as property in the Slave Markets in Charleston. And what evidence do we have of their suffering today? The Slave Markets are preserved in Old Charleston, but any trace of where the ships from Liverpool landed, any trace of where the slaves were held, this Ellis Island of Slavery - but for a lonely historical marker and finally a donated bench - has been totally lost. On Sullvian's Island, it's still as if it never happened.

Professor Gordon Wenham & Revd Dr John Nolland, Trinity College, Bristol, have written a thorough rebuttal to the revisionist rethought that James Jones apparently embraced publicly after his visit to the Diocese of Virginia.

Thought for the day

"What is certain at this juncture is that the McCall paper
drives a stake through the heart of the argument
that a diocese cannot lawfully declare itself
independent of The Episcopal Church."

A. S. Haley
Anglican Curmudgeon