PROPOSED revisions to the Canons, specifically to Title I revision (Canon I.17.8), by the Episcopal Church's Task Force is meeting with objections from clergy and laity alike. One layman, a retired attorney, wrote to VOL saying the changes, which will allow the diocesan bishop to remove from office any parish elected or appointed official for any reason he/she choses. "This is an outrageous intrusion on the purely internal affairs of the parish," he wrote VOL. "The 40-page revision to Title IV (Ecclesiastical Discipline) of the Canons would deny to all subordinate clerics their US Constitutional rights in any dispute with their superiors including their right of appeal to the civil courts."
Rufus W. Peckham, Jr., went on to say, "I wish to register my strongest objections to certain provisions of the proposed revision of Sec. 8 of Canon I.17.8. Both Subsections (a) and (b) contain the phrase '". . . by the Ecclesiastical Authority of the diocese in which the office is being exercised, with the advise and consent of the Standing Committee; . . .'" These phrases constitute nothing less than an unwarranted, insulting and intolerable intrusion by the diocese into the purely internal affairs of its constituent parishes. Unpaid appointed and elected laity currently fill innumerable critical positions of parish trust and responsibility; e.g. wardens, vestry members, choristers, committee chairs and members, etc., etc. These volunteers perform their duties under the overall supervision of the parish rector and it goes without saying that they may be removed at any time by whatever authority appointed or elected them in the first place. To make them also subject to the whims, preferences and caprices of the '"Ecclesiastical Authority'" (presumably the diocesan bishop) would undoubtedly result in the immediate resignation of considerable numbers of those dedicated laity who presently serve their parishes and our Lord so nobly and so well in these positions. I base that conclusion on personal observations and discussions with persons likely to be affected who find these provisions as objectionable and unacceptable as I do. For the foregoing reasons I urge the Task Force to reject those unwise portions of the proposed revision to Canon I.17.8 as aforesaid. With their rejection Subsection (c) is meaningless and therefore should also be rejected."
Rufus W. Peckham, Jr. is a communicant member of Christ Church, Georgetown Episcopal Diocese of Washington (DC). The deadline for filing comments is June 30. *****
Source: VirtueOnline
No comments:
Post a Comment