From Bishop Henderson, re: House of Bishops | Print |
September 18, 2008
The Feast Day of Edward Bouverie Pusey
Sisters and Brothers, Greetings from Salt Lake City, where the House of Bishops is meeting. Yesterday we focused on our experience at the Lambeth Conference in July, about which, more anon. You are probably more interested today in the action of the House of Bishops regarding +Robert Duncan, Bishop of the Diocese of Pittsburgh.
Last night we met for more than an hour discussing the canons, their meaning, and the process leading up to the present situation. This morning we began our discussion of the certification of the Title IV Review Committee, based on information provided by attorneys for certain clergy and laity of the Diocese of Pittsburgh, as well as the Presiding Bishop, that Bishop Duncan had abandoned the communion of this Church by renouncing the discipline of The Episcopal Church (which renunciation is defined as abandonment in the Canons).
The following is a fairly accurate account of my statement to the House at the very beginning of discussion; after identifying myself (always the practice, whenever one speaks) by name, diocese and as President of the Review Committee, I continued:
As an attorney-and self-appointed President of the House of Bishops Bar Association-I am wondering whether we are permitting the letter of the canons undermine the spirit for which the canons were crafted.
"Let me say clearly that I concur completely with the finding and certification of the Review Committee. My only concern is with the timing. There is no question in my mind that +Bob Duncan intends to leave The Episcopal Church-and in his heart and mind perhaps already has. I don't doubt that Duncan intends to do exactly what he has said he will do, personally, and with his diocese.
"I am persuaded by the legal argument of the (Presiding Bishop's) Chancellor regarding interpretation of the phrase ‘whole number of bishops entitled to vote'; it is akin to my own views on that issue. So I do not question the validity and legitimacy of our action in finding that John-David Schofield had abandoned.
"And I am concerned, too, about the legal issues (especially those relating to property), should abandonment by Duncan not be found at this particular point in time. I appreciate the presentation already made by Bishop Sauls (who had discussed relevant laws of Pennsylvania), but expect that, despite our action, the matter of title to property will nevertheless end up in the secular courts.
"But I am influenced heavily by the impact on relationships-relationship within The Episcopal Church and relationships within the Anglican Communion, if we act now rather than acting AFTER the Pittsburgh Convention has its second reading on the proposed constitutional change. To be sure, there will be a price to be paid whether abandonment is determined now or then-but I think the cost will be considerably higher if we are seen to act precipitously. There is a matter of "good will", of mercy, as well as justice, which I consider relevant.
"Yes, Duncan intends to abandon within the meaning of the canon-no doubt in my mind whatsoever. But I think the finding of abandonment will be viewed as less unacceptable, less unfavorably, if the diocesan convention has acted the necessary two times, rather than just one. I also believe that we should put the ball back in Duncan's court-let the decision be his, not ours.
"I also consider it important that we attempt as much as possible to separate what we think and feel about Bob Duncan (and others considering similar moves) from the greater good of Christ's mission and Church-that is, separate personalities from what, by God's grace, we can do to promote more effectively both the mission AND the unity of the Church.
"I am anxious to hear the thoughts and opinions of others, but this is where I am at the moment. I am not compelled, or even impelled-but I am inclined to vote no on a finding of abandonment now, and to vote yes on any effort to suspend action until after the Pittsburgh convention acts.
"My prayer for myself at this point is similar to the line from the hymn we sang today during Morning Prayer: ‘Listen to the voice of wisdom...."
After several hours of discussion and prayer, I ultimately voted "no" on the proposed resolution which would authorize the Presiding Bishop to make a finding of abandonment as defined by the canon. The resolution, however, passed.
For more information on today's action, see the statement prepared by several of us bishops who, although voting on opposite sides of the resolution, were asked to draft a statement for public release. It may be found through a link on our diocesan website, and on the website of The Episcopal Church.
As I stated for the benefit of that draft: "This is one of the most somber and solemn occasions in my experience as a bishop. It is a time for prayer for all of us-especially for Bishop Duncan and the Episcopalians of the Diocese of Pittsburgh."
Coveting your prayers as always, I remain faithfully yours in our Lord, +Dorsey USC VII
No comments:
Post a Comment