Letter from Bishop Jerry Lamb and the Standing Committee of The Diocese of San Joaquin to all Bishops and Standing Committees regarding the consent for Bishop-elect Dan Martins

The continuing Diocese of San Joaquin has many concerns about the proposed bishop of Springfield and rightly so in my opinion.


the Episcopal
Diocese of San Joaquin
The Central Third of California
The Rt. Rev. Jerry A. Lamb, Bishop
The Rev. Canon Mark H. Hall, Canon to the Ordinary
October 16, 2010
Sent via E-mail and US Mail
Dear Bishops and Standing Committee Members,
The Standing Committee of the Diocese of San Joaquin joins me in sending you this
letter that outlines our grave concerns about the election of the Rev. Daniel Martins as
the Bishop Diocesan of the Diocese of Springfield, Illinois. Our concern is not about the
electing process, but about the suitability of Daniel Martins to be ordained a bishop in
the Episcopal Church. We write to you now before the consent process is in full swing,
so you will know of our concerns and have a chance to review pertinent information
about Daniel Martins and his involvement in the attempted separation of the Episcopal
Diocese of San Joaquin from the Episcopal Church. We also request that you visit
Daniel Martins’ website (http://cariocaconfessions.blogspot.com/) and review his comments
about the startup of the Continuing Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin. All of the
material concerning Daniel Martins’ relationship to the Diocese of San Joaquin can be
found on our diocesan website (www.diosanjoaquin.org) under “Updates” on the right
sidebar or by direct link at http://www.diosanjoaquin.org/dioceseofspringfieldconsent.html .
Daniel Martins came to the Diocese of San Joaquin in 1994 when he was called to be
the rector of St. John the Evangelist Episcopal Church in Stockton. He remained at St.
John’s until August 2007 when he accepted a call to St. Anne’s Episcopal Church in
Warsaw, Diocese of Northern Indiana. St. John’s is the oldest Episcopal Church in
Stockton (and was one of the leading parishes in the diocese.) Only months after
Martins left St. John’s, the parish chose to follow John-David Schofield in the attempt to
leave the Episcopal Church. It is our contention that Daniel Martins did not prepare this
congregation to remain in the Episcopal Church, but did just the opposite. St. John’s,
Stockton is one of the few incorporated parishes in the diocese, and we were forced to
file suit to recover this property for the Episcopal Church.
While residing in the Diocese of San Joaquin, Daniel Martins was very active in
diocesan affairs. He was elected a deputy to General Convention multiple times, the
last time in 2006. The Diocesan Council meeting minutes on April 8, 2006 report on a
discussion of the upcoming Diocesan Convention resolution regarding disassociation
from the Episcopal Church. In response to a question as to why deputies to General
Convention 2006 had questions about the timing of the resolution, the Rev James Snell
is referenced: “Read e-mail from Dan Martins. Endorse substance of proposal but
Diocesan Office: 1528 Oakdale road • Modesto • CA • 95355
Ph. 209-576-0104 • FAX 209-576-0114
October 16, 2010
Page 2
concerned that (1) language provocative, (2) timing is ill-advised (prior to GC 2006) -
diverts attention, (3) resolution will be spun by Bps adversaries, (4) robs GC deputations
of effectiveness and credibility at GC. If GC rejects Windsor Report, then it will be time
to act and Dan will lead the charge.” (See http://www.diosanjoaquin.org/doc/CouncilMinutesApr2006)
In John-David Schofield’s address to convention in December 2006, when the first
reading of the proposed change to the Constitution was made, he made the following
statement, “Working independently of this Virginia meeting, three of our rural deans:
Frs. Dan Martins, Jim Snell, and Richard James came up with a substitute for the
original proposed changes to our diocesan constitution.” This substitute amendment
became the very amendment that the disaffiliating parties attempted to use as their
vehicle to leave the Church. (See http://www.diosanjoaquin.org/doc/SchofieldAddr2006)
When former Bishop Schofield called for a vote in 2006 on this constitutional change
removing the accession clause (after rejecting the motion for a secret ballot) and called
for a vote by delegates standing in favor, reliable witnesses noted that Daniel Martins
voted in the affirmative.
The Standing Committee and I contend Daniel Martins was instrumental to the process
that led to first and second votes by the diocese to change the Constitutions and
Canons that resulted in the failed attempt to unilaterally leave the Episcopal Church.
Further excerpts from Diocesan documents are available at our diocesan website.
(See for example, email dated June17, 2007 from Martins to Standing Committee
http://www.diosanjoaquin.org/doc/Email6172007 , Standing Committee minutes from June 2007
http://www.diosanjoaquin.org/doc/SCMinutesJun2007 , and email from Dan Martins in December
2006 http://www.diosanjoaquin.org/doc/Email12182006)
We also urge you to read excerpts from Daniel Martins’ blog entitled “Confessions of a
Carioca.” (See http://www.diosanjoaquin.org/doc/DanMartinsBlogExcerpts ) The following are
examples from his blog.
3-5-2008: There's a new group of Non-Jurors in the process of formation even
as I write. They are former clergy and laity of the Diocese of San Joaquin. Their
principled stand places them between the "rock" of their former bishop, whom
they have loved and served loyally, but whom they cannot in good conscience
follow to the Province of the Southern Cone, and the "hard place" of the noncanonical
rump "remaining" Diocese of San Joaquin, which they cannot in good
conscience join because it represents the raw exercise of naked illicit power by
the Presiding Bishop, and because to do so would compromise their oath of
loyalty to the Constitution and Canons of the Episcopal Church.
7-13-2008: Now, aside from the ... what shall we say? ... ungenerous ... tone of
the missive, it raises some curious issues. It comes as no news that, for a
Diocesan Office: 1528 Oakdale road • Modesto • CA • 95355
Ph. 209-576-0104 • FAX 209-576-0114
October 16, 2010
Page 3
number of substantive technical reasons, I recognize neither the constitutional
foundation of the "Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin" nor the authority of Bishop
Jerry Lamb. By any rational reading of the Constitution & Canons of the
Episcopal Church, we're talking about a bogus diocese with a bogus bishop,
though they have some impressive-looking stationery. That they exist at all, and
are able to maintain the chimera of legitimacy is a result only of the raw exercise
of naked political power on the part of the Presiding Bishop. She is manifestly
guilty of presentable offenses but it will never happen because the political
calculus just isn't there.
Out of concern for the Episcopal Church, we urge you to review the information in this
letter, on our website (http://www.diosanjoaquin.org/dioceseofspringfieldconsent.html), and in
Daniel Martins’ own blog.
Upon reviewing the materials, we believe that it is clear that Daniel Martins not only
actively supported and voted to attempt to remove the Diocese from the Episcopal
Church. Furthermore, it is implicit in his writings and actions that he clearly holds the
belief that a Diocese may leave this Church unilaterally, which is contrary to our
understanding of Anglicanism and the polity of the Episcopal Church.
In closing, the consent process, as mandated by our canons, is the only way the wider
Church can respond to the election of a person to be a bishop. Accordingly, we would
ask you to join us in withholding consent for Daniel Martins to become the Bishop of
Springfield.
Peace,
+Jerry A. Lamb
Bishop of San Joaquin
Members of the Standing Committee
of the Diocese of San Joaquin

LOS ANGELES: Mary Glasspool receives required number of standing committee consents in unofficial tally

By ENS staff, March 10, 2010

[Episcopal News Service] Diocese of Los Angeles Bishop-elect Mary Douglas Glasspool has received the required number of consents from diocesan standing committees to her ordination and consecration, pending verification by the presiding bishop's office.

The Diocese of Los Angeles announced March 10 that Glasspool had received 61 standing committee consents, in an unofficial tally. A majority of consents, or 56, were required from standing committees in the Episcopal Church's 109 dioceses.

"I give thanks for the standing commitees' prompt action, and for the consents to the elections of my sisters," Los Angeles Bishop Diocesan J. Jon Bruno said on March 10, referring to both Glasspool and Bishop-elect Diane Jardine Bruce.

"I look forward to the final few consents to come in from the bishops in the next few days, and I give thanks for the fact that we as a church have taken a bold step for just action."

Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori's office has yet to verify the official number of bishops with jurisdiction who have consented to Glasspool's ordination and consecration.

The Rev. Canon Charles Robertson, canon to the presiding bishop, told ENS that the consent process for a bishop-elect lasts the full 120 days as prescribed by the canons of the church, unless that person receives the required majority of consents before the period is over, at which time an announcement can be made. Until the required number of consents is received, or the 120-day period ends, bishops and standing committees are able to change their vote, he said.

Glasspool, 56, was elected bishop suffragan on Dec. 5. Her ordination and consecration is planned for May 15.

Jefferts Schori is expected to be the chief consecrator for Glasspool, and for Bruce, who was electedbishop suffragan Dec. 4.

The presiding bishop's office on March 8 announced a successful consent process for Bruce.

Glasspool has served as canon to the bishops in the Baltimore-based Diocese of Maryland for the past eight years. During her 28-year ordained ministry, Glasspool has served congregations in Maryland, Massachusetts and Pennsylvania.

Glasspool is the second openly gay partnered priest to be elected a bishop in the Episcopal Church. The first was Bishop Gene Robinson of New Hampshire, who was elected in 2003.

Under the canons of the Episcopal Church (III.11.4), a majority of bishops exercising jurisdiction and diocesan standing committees must consent to a bishop-elect's ordination as bishop within 120 days of receiving notice of the election.

The 120-day process for Glasspool lasts until May 8 and the diocese has been updating the process each Wednesday on its website.

As outlined under Canon III.11.4 (a) for every bishop election, the presiding bishop confirms the receipt of consents from a majority of bishops with jurisdiction, and reviews the evidence of consents from diocesan standing committees sent to her by the standing committee of the electing diocese.

In Canon III.11.4 (b), standing committees, in consenting to ordination and consecration, attest they are "fully sensible of how important it is that the Sacred Order and Office of a Bishop should not be unworthily conferred, and firmly persuaded that it is our duty to bear testimony on this solemn occasion without partiality, do, in the presence of Almighty God, testify that we know of no impediment on account of which the Reverend A.B. ought not to be ordained to that Holy Office. We do, moreover, jointly and severally declare that we believe the Reverend A.B. to have been duly and lawfully elected and to be of such sufficiency in learning, of such soundness in the Faith, and of such godly character as to be able to exercise the Office of a Bishop to the honor of God and the edifying of the Church, and to be a wholesome example to the flock of Christ."

The canons do not specify the wording that bishops must use to give their consent, other than to say in Canon III.11.4 (a) that the presiding bishop requests of each bishop with jurisdiction "a statement of consent or withholding of consent."

The consent process begins after post-election procedural matters, including physical and psychological examinations, have been completed and formal notices are sent by the presiding bishop's office to bishops with jurisdiction, with separate notices from the electing diocese to the standing committees of each of the dioceses in the Episcopal Church.

Proposed Resolutions for Rescheduled DioSC Convention

This resolution will be before the Diocese of South Carolina Convention. The Episcopal Church can't hire a lawyer in South Carolina to protect TEC's interests there? WOW!!

Proposed Resolution R-2 2010 Convention

Offered by: The Standing Committee

Subject: Response to Ecclesiastical Intrusions by the Presiding Bishop

RESOLVED, That this 219th Convention of the Diocese of South Carolina affirms its legal and ecclesiastical authority as a sovereign diocese within the Episcopal Church, and be it further

RESOLVED, That this Convention declares the Presiding Bishop has no authority to retain attorneys in this Diocese that present themselves as the legal counsel for the Episcopal Church in South Carolina, and be it finally

RESOLVED, That the Diocese of South Carolina demands that the Presiding Bishop drop the retainer of all such legal counsel in South Carolina as has been obtained contrary to the express will of this Diocese, which is The Episcopal Church within its borders.

The ACNA debate in the Synod in England

The Synod in England will debate whether to acknowledge the ACNA (the alphabet soup of American dissident Episcopalians). Unfortunately, the group continues to assert that they are blameless in the current struggles. Much has been written on this and it is clear that they are not blameless. SEE

But another problem with this debate is represented by this quote from the member of the Synod who proposed the resolution to accept the ACNA into the fold of the Anglican Communion.

Most lay members, like myself, have little understanding of the technical ‘ins’ and ‘outs’ of canon law with it uses and misuses. What is clear however is the shocking, unjust treatment of historical/biblical Anglicans as they seek to continue living out their faith within these provinces.

This is the neat trick that this group has pulled. They have fairly successfully characterized themselves as "historical Anglicans." The problem is that they are not. For centuries Anglicanism has been known as the middle way and represent by a broad tent where many views were allowed. Anglicanism has not been a communion brought together by a creed but by common worship. ACNA and their ilk suggest that the Episcopal Church has somehow broken with tradition. In fact those who demand (and I do mean demand) unity of thought and belief are what is new and foreign to Anglicanism. Historical Anglicanism has never been about unity of thought or belief it has always been broad enough to allow differences in how Anglicanism was expressed especially in different places. They can not claim to be representative of historical Anglicanism.

Further, they can not claim to be the only Biblical Anglicans in North America. Again, Anglicanism has allowed for different interpretations and allowed for evolution in understand the Bible and encouraged critical Biblical interpretation at least until lately. People who take the Bible seriously can find that there are not prohibitions on ordaining women and gay men and lesbians. It does not make them non Biblical and until recently differing views like these were perfectly fine in Anglicanism.

About the only claim they can make related to this is to be historically Biblical. They would freeze in time (although when this time would be is open to much debate within the group) a set of interpretations of the Bible. They kid themselves and say they are true to the original meaning of the Bible. They are not. They will not stone their children for speaking back and until recently we thought they would not condemn to death homosexuals (although again the recent actions in Nigeria raise some doubt about this). They do not take the Bible literally they are just willing to apply interpretations to a time they are comfortable with. There is lots of historical support for this type of interpretation. It was used to justify slavery, to disallow divorce, and to keep women in their place.

To the extent that the debate in the Synod takes as a given that these people are historical/biblical Anglicans the fight is largely lost. They are foreign to Anglicanism. That doesn't necessarily make them bad people just not Anglican and they should not be recognized as a part of the Anglican Communion.

Response to Dissidents

I wrote about the Dissident report that alleged orthodox Anglicans in the US have sent to the synod in England here . The point is an attempt to get the synod to recognize the Alphabet Soup as a member of the Anglican communion. As I said here, it would be filled with falsehoods and half truths. A response has not be written and sent to the synod so they might have a better picture of who is asking for recognition. It also appears the The Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church will be there clarify any misunderstanding. The Report sites some classic oldies like the Chapman Memo and Following the Money. It is easy for those of us who have struggled with these people for so long to forget how truly evil some of their actions have been. This memo is a good synopsis of who the dissidents are.

The purpose of this note is to rebut factual inaccuracies relating to The Episcopal Church in General Synod paper GS 1764A, a briefing paper for a Private Members’ Motion dealing with the relationship between the Church of England and the Anglican Church in North America (ACNA). A separate note refers to The Anglican Church of Canada.

Acknowledgements:

In compiling this note I have consulted David Booth Beers, Chancellor to the Presiding Bishop and Mary E. Kostel, Special Counsel to the Presiding Bishop for property litigation and discipline. I have also been assisted by: the Revd Tobias Stanislas Haller BSG, the Revd Scott Gunn, and Ms Susan Erdey of the Church Pension Group.

Simon Sarmiento

Valuable background reading:

Professor Bruce Mullin’s Affidavit in the case of the Diocese of Ohio
http://thinkinganglicans.org.uk/uploads/mullin01.pdf

Professor Bruce Mullin’s Affidavit in the case of the Diocese of Fort Worth
http://tinyurl.com/mullin03

Constitution and Canons of The Episcopal Church (2009)
http://extranet.generalconvention.org/staff/files/download/648

The “Chapman report”
http://www.thinkinganglicans.org.uk/ss/archives/000405.html

The “Barfoot memo”
www.thinkinganglicans.org.uk/overseasAEO.pdf

Following the Money
http://www.edow.org/follow

The paper GS 1764A makes allegations concerning two main topics: clergy and property. Quotations from the paper are in italics.

Clergy

In relation to “the use of Canons in the depositions of bishops and clergy” the paper suggests that 12 ACNA bishops and 404 clergy have been deposed from TEC, and that

“bishops and priests who have not left [TEC] are deposed without due canonical process because of what they might do, or that they should be formally advised that they have abandoned their ministry when they have done nothing of the kind”

The numbers quoted in the paper and much else comes directly from a document referenced there:http://www.americananglican.org/assets/Resources/TEC-Canonical-Abuses.pdf produced by the American Anglican Council, a group that has campaigned relentlessly against the leadership of The Episcopal Church since at least February 2001 (although its antecedents are even older). A refutation of all its claims is beyond the scope of this note.

The numbers are incorrect. Only 3 bishops have been deposed recently (see details below) and the total of ACNA-related clergy depositions to date is 170. The number of former TEC bishops associated with ACNA is eleven.

Two key principles underlie the TEC approach to the issue of clergy movements:

• The Episcopal Church requires all clergy to subscribe to a declaration which reads: “ … I do solemnly engage to conform to the Doctrine, Discipline, and Worship of the Episcopal Church.”

• The Episcopal Church takes extremely seriously the issue of provincial and diocesan geographic boundaries and, like the Church of England, does not permit any of its own bishops to perform Episcopal acts within the boundaries of any of its dioceses without the express approval of the relevant diocesan bishop.

It is important to note that the declaration, commonly known as the Declaration of Conformity, refers specifically to the Episcopal Church and not to any wider body, such as the Anglican Communion. Its use is mandated by Article VIII of the TEC Constitution and by the Ordinal of the American Book of Common Prayer.

The same Declaration is required of all clergy – including bishops – who come from other provinces of the Anglican Communion to minister in TEC. Canon III.10.2 reads in part (emphasis added):

Before receiving the Member of the Clergy the Bishop shall require a promise in writing to submit in all things to the Discipline of this Church, without recourse to any foreign jurisdiction, civil or ecclesiastical; and shall further require the person to subscribe and make in the Bishop's presence, and in the presence of two or more Presbyters, the declaration required in Article VIII of the Constitution.

All clergy – including bishops – who leave TEC for another province of the Anglican Communion, or for any other church, are required to complete a corresponding exit process under the Renunciation canons (III.9.8 priests and deacons, III.12.7 bishops). The Renunciation canons are explicit that the subject matter is “renunciation of the ordained Ministry of this Church” (emphasis added).

The American Anglican Council and others have repeatedly misrepresented the use of the Renunciation canons (III.9.8 priests and deacons, III.12.7 bishops) as being of similar effect to the Deposition canons (IV.9 bishops, IV.10 priests and deacons). This is wholly incorrect, and the use of the Renunciation canons has no implications with regard to the indelibility of orders. The process is purely juridical in nature, and is easily reversed if the individual changes their mind and wishes to return to TEC (as happened twice for example in the case of another former Bishop of Fort Worth, Clarence Pope). In a clear majority of cases of clergy leaving TEC for ACNA or one of its predecessors, TEC bishops have taken this pastoral approach in preference to Deposition.

TEC also has a separate canonical process for transfer of clergy between dioceses within TEC, known as Letters Dimissory (canon III.9.5 Section 4) but this process is not now used for transfers outside TEC.

Three TEC bishops were deposed recently under Canon IV.9 Of Abandonment of the Communion of This Church by a Bishop.

• Bishop William Cox, retired Bishop Suffragan of Maryland, resident in the Diocese of Kansas: performed Episcopal acts, including ordinations, on behalf of the Church of Uganda without permission of the local TEC diocesan bishop, since June 2005, deposed in March 2008.
• Bishop John-David Schofield, formerly Bishop of San Joaquin: purported to remove that diocese from TEC to affiliate with the Province of the Southern Cone, deposed in March 2008.
• Bishop Robert Duncan, formerly Bishop of Pittsburgh: purported to remove that diocese from TEC to affiliate with the Province of the Southern Cone, deposed in September 2008.

Nine other bishops now associated with ACNA were treated under Canon III.12.7 Renunciation of the Ordained Ministry. One was Bishop Jack Iker, formerly Bishop of Fort Worth, who also purported to remove his diocese from TEC and affiliate it with the Province of the Southern Cone, in November 2008,but then announced that he had voluntarily left TEC, before the abandonment process could take its course.

Seven others were retired or resigned American bishops who voluntarily decided to leave TEC, associate with other provinces of the Anglican Communion while remaining resident in various TEC dioceses, and continuing to perform Episcopal acts without the consent of the local diocesan bishop.

Also, a former Church of England bishop, Henry Scriven, who had served as Assistant Bishop in Pittsburgh, returned to the Church of England. When Bishop Scriven became an Assistant Bishop in Pittsburgh, he was required, in accordance with normal practice, to make the Declaration of Conformity described above.

As an Assistant Bishop in the Diocese of Pittsburgh, his office ceased upon Bishop Duncan’s deposition, in September 2008, by virtue of Canon III.12.5 although he conducted an Ordination after that date without the consent of the Ecclesiastical Authority of the TEC diocese. He notified the Presiding Bishop that he was returning to England and placing himself under the jurisdiction of the Bishop of Oxford. He was thus expected to make a Renunciation in accordance with Canon III.12.7 as described above. It is untrue that he was deposed.

The American Anglican Council document claims a total of 161 clergy depositions over several years – apart from bishops . This is in error. There were 9 additional ones in Quincy in November 2009 that have been omitted, so the correct number is 170. The use of depositions varies from diocese to diocese, for example in Pittsburgh there have been none apart from Bishop Duncan. To put the AAC claim in perspective the total numbers of clergy removals of all types, including depositions, for all reasons, for each of the last four years, ending December 2008 were: 70, 71, 101, and 109. The current total number of clergy in good standing in The Episcopal Church is c. 18,000.

Property

The paper misleadingly claims as follows:

Lawsuits Concerning Property

At the General Convention in 1979, the Committee on Canons of the House of Bishops proposed the following Canon, which was adopted: “All real and personal property held by or for the benefit of any Parish, Mission or congregation is held in trust for this Church [i. e. the Episcopal Church in the United States, my insert] and the Diocese thereof………”. It is often known as the Dennis Canon from the name of its drafter, though more strictly it is now Title I. 7. 4 of the Canons of the Protestant Episcopal Church of the United States of America.

At a stroke, all parish property was transferred to the ownership of the national church. (In legal terms however, this transfer of property may not be beyond challenge as, unlike Measures of General Synod, the “laws” of TEC are not laws of the land. ) In English terms, the equivalent would be the transference of all parish, parish trust and benefice property to the Archbishops’ Council together with the assets of the Church Commissioners.

In the United States, a particularly unpleasant aspect of litigation has been the willingness of TEC and some dioceses such as San Diego and Los Angeles to sue individual vestry (the American equivalent of PCC) members of departing congregations, in addition to the parish corporations of which they were trustee members. Litigation of this kind has the consequence of putting at risk of forfeiture the personal bank accounts, savings and homes of lay church officers. Some have had difficulty in refinancing their mortgages (as defendants in a personal financial lawsuit) and have had their credit ratings put in jeopardy.

And at the end of the paper, it also says (emphasis added):

In asking Synod to express a desire to be in communion with ACNA, there is therefore no suggestion that we should not remain in communion with TEC or ACoC, nor am I suggesting that everyone in ACNA is a paragon of perfection. Rather, it is a recognition that there is a considerable and growing body of faithful Anglicans representing a wide range of church traditions, many of whom have been hurt, who are now members of ACNA. They would be grateful to be in communion with the Church of England as the Windsor/Covenant process works through. In some cases it might also help parishes to retain the property they have built and paid for.

While the lack of establishment necessitates some real differences, for all practical and canonical purposes, Episcopal parishes are substantially similar to those in England. For example, the canons regulate the definition of parish boundaries, formation of new congregations within the bounds of an existing parish (and requiring its permission) and deferring to civil divisions where church authority has not [yet] defined parish boundaries. (Canon I.13) Clergy are not to exercise ministry in another’s cure without permission. (Canon III.9.6.b) The “geographical” nature of the church is well laid out in Episcopal canon law.

Getting into the details of property, the paper completely misunderstands the question of ownership versus trusteeship. It attempts to draw a contrast between the situation in England and the United States while they are in fact very similar if not identical. The “Dennis Canon” (about which more below) did not “transfer ownership” of parish property, but clarified the trustee relationship that parish leaders have in relation to the larger church, just as in England.

This trustee relationship has only ever meant that the national church has an enforceable interest to ensure that the property should be used only for the mission of the church. A helpful comparison may be made with the provisions of the Parochial Church Councils (Powers) Measure 1956 and The Incumbents and Churchwardens (Trusts) Measure 1964.

This clarification came at the recommendation of the Supreme Court of the United States, which reaffirmed that civil courts were not to become entangled in settling religious disputes. An 1872 case (Watson v. Jones) clarified that either implied trust or being part of (and answerable to) a general church (both of which applied to Episcopal parishes) were sufficient to decide in favour of the diocese or national church, and under civil law this is how the vast bulk of property dispute cases were settled for over a century. In a 1979 case (Jones v. Wolf) the Supreme Court ruled that “neutral principles” might also be considered. Recognizing that this was a shift in the application of civil law, the Court noted (emphasis added):

At any time before the dispute erupts, the parties can ensure, if they so desire, that the faction loyal to the hierarchical church will retain the church property. They can modify the deeds or the corporate charter to include a right of reversion or trust in favor of the general church. Alternatively, the constitution of the general church can be made to recite an express trust in favor of the denominational church.

The Episcopal Church chose to accept this invitation, and adopted the “Dennis Canon” — named for Bishop Walter D. Dennis, Suffragan of New York — as a declaration of what the church had always held to be the case, and which had been the almost universal understanding under the civil law up to that time, that is, rendering the implied consent or trust explicit. As the Court had stated in 1872, in defining the nature of a hierarchical church such as The Episcopal Church (which they named explicitly as an example):

All who unite themselves to such a body do so with an implied consent to this government, and are bound to submit to it. But it would be a vain consent and would lead to the total subversion of such religious bodies, if anyone aggrieved by one of their decisions could appeal to the secular courts and have them reversed. It is of the essence of these religious unions, and of their right to establish tribunals for the decision of questions arising among themselves, that those decisions should be binding in all cases of ecclesiastical cognizance, subject only to such appeals as the organism itself provides for.

Thus, what the paper perceives as some sort of novel transfer of property rights was actually a continuation of what had been well understood practice, and canonical requirement, for over a century, and the underlying principle has been recognized by the appellate courts of all but one American state in which cases have been tried.

It is not that the courts are reluctant to address disputes involving churches, but that the rule of law, rather than debate over doctrine, should be the controlling factor. The paper seeks to introduce just such a doctrinal debate (as to who is more faithful to “Anglican belief and practice”). By gaining a form of approval for dissident congregations from the Church of England the motion is hoping to make use of the very legal principle its proposer holds to be inappropriate — but at the level of the Communion rather than of the Diocese or Province — in order for ACNA and its parishes to succeed in their litigation.

A motion by General Synod is unlikely to have such an effect, but will exacerbate the lawsuits by introducing additional confusion, and likely raise false hopes that parish property will be retained by those departing from the very church whose existence made their holding property in trust as a corporate parish possible. Such an action by General Synod will represent an interference not only in the polity of the Episcopal Church, but in the civil courts — and will increase both the extent and expense of litigation.

Which brings us to the issue of natural justice. First of all it must be noted that in many cases the vote of a vestry or congregation to secede from the Episcopal Church is not unanimous — the rights of the minority who wished to remain loyal to the Episcopal Church appears not to factor into consideration in this paper. Moreover, with the exception of those few parishes actually founded and constructed by the present generation, and however “faithful” the dissident members may be, they are in point of fact alienating property that had been dedicated to the use of the Episcopal Church and its worship. (In some recent instances, dissident parishes have come to a settlement with their respective dioceses, and been able to retain property on condition they do not re-affiliate — the situation is not as black and white as the paper portrays it.)

The paper complains about the liability vestry members may encounter when their congregation moves to disassociate from the Episcopal Church. While acknowledging that this is the law in Canada, the author appears not to understand that it is also the law in much of the United States (again, such matters vary from state to state but the liability of vestry members for their corporate acts is a matter of civil law not church law.) In those states where this is the case, vestry members are generally covered by Directors and Officers Liability Insurance, for that very reason. In fact, it is contrary to the policy of The Episcopal Church to seek financial remedies from laypersons, and it has never done so.

Natural justice requires that people take responsibility for their actions. No one has forced individual clergy or laity to leave the Episcopal Church — and they do have the right to do so if their consciences are wounded by the decisions of that church. It is, however, a matter of both church and civil law — and natural justice — that they do not have any right to retain property given in support of the church when they choose to leave it.

Simon Sarmiento
4 February 2010

Report by Dissidents

But don't bother. The alphabet soup that is dissident Anglicanism has released a report about how they were abused by the Episcopal Church. I was going to read it and then I read the article with its release. It contained this line.

This paper illustrates the lengths to which TEC leaders will go to silence the voices of orthodox Christians in the Anglican Communion - Anglicans whose only offense was to stand for the uniqueness of Jesus Christ and Anglican Communion teaching.

Wow. Only offense? How about taking property that doesn't belong to you? How about years of trying to undermine the Episcopal Church from within and when that wasn't going well leaving and trying to be members of both groups at the same time? How about "Seize the Day?" How about . . . I could go on and on. The idea that these are nice blameless people who have done nothing wrong is laughable. I decided not to read their rant. If they had some willingness to share some of the blame for these sad affairs I would have read it. But no. Not this group. Also missing I would guess (since I will not read it) is any mention of the lawsuits initiated by dissident groups.

If you want to read it, it is here.

http://www.americananglican.org/assets/Resources/TEC-Canonical-Abuses.pdf

But don't bother it will be exactly what you expect preening and posturing and a one sided description of activities that there were mostly to blame for.

Devastating Pictures from Haiti

The Episcopal Diocese of Haiti is the largest in the Episcopal Church and their Cathedral was destroyed. Thanks to Bishop Pierre Whalon who posted this on his blog.

PITTSBURGH: Judge orders property returned to Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh

Good News from Pittsburgh!!!

Once again the lawyers for dissidents lead them astray. They were never going to win and were mislead into thinking they were. Eventually the lawyers will stop advising the dissidents that they have any chance. That is long past due. It is approaching time when some of the dissidents should sue for malpractice for the horrible advice they are getting.

[Episcopal News Service] A judge has told the organization headed by former bishop Robert Duncan that claims to have withdrawn from the Episcopal Church in 2008 that it must turn over control of the Diocese of Pittsburgh's assets.

In a Jan. 29 order County Court of Common Pleas Judge Joseph M. James accepted as accurate an inventory of diocesan property submitted by a "special master" he had appointed earlier and told Duncan's organization it must transfer the assets.

The inventory includes $22 million in cash, cash equivalents, receivables, and investments including about $2.5 million in pooled parish investments and real estate and other real property.

"The diocese plans to quickly make arrangements so that all parishes may again have access to their investment funds that were frozen by financial institutions during the legal proceedings," according to a news release from the Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh.

On Oct. 4, 2008 a majority of the delegates to the diocese's 143rd annual convention approved a resolution by which the diocese purported to leave the Episcopal Church. The leaders who departed have said that they remain in charge of an entity they have been calling the Anglican Diocese of Pittsburgh that is now part of the Argentina-based Anglican Province of the Southern Cone. And they say that in that capacity they control all the assets that were held by the diocese when they left.

Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas Judge Joseph M. James, however, ruled Oct. 6 that all diocesan assets must be held by the Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh that is recognized by the Episcopal Church. James' opinion and order are here.

The group led by Duncan said Oct. 29 that it would appeal the ruling once the court issues a final order directing it to transfer the property to the Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh of the Episcopal Church of the United States of America.

In a Jan. 30 e-mail, Duncan told the diocese he leads that he wanted "to assure you that we will continue to work diligently for the protection of all our parishes and for the good of our mission and ministry."

James' order says that financial institutions and repositories, trustees and fiduciaries must only act on instructions from the Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh, that no real property can be sold or its current occupants removed without a court order, that holders of "altar artifacts" are answerable to the diocese as to their use (and that they cannot be sold or transferred to another location without a court order) and that people or entities who have borrowed money from the diocese (close to $1 million) are answerable to the Episcopal diocese.

Duncan's diocese has 20 days from Jan. 29 to give the Episcopal diocese the financial records, documents and other electronically stored information it needs to hold and administer the property.

There are two versions of the order: a confidential version and a public version from which financial account information has been removed.

The suit arose out of a 2003 complaint by Calvary Episcopal Church in Pittsburgh after a special diocesan convention passed a resolution stating that all property in the diocese, which under Episcopal Church canons must held and used for the mission of the church, would be held free of that obligation.

The proceedings in the suit led to an October 2005 stipulated court order in which Duncan and the other then-leaders of the diocese agreed that the "Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh of the Episcopal Church of the United States of America" would continue to hold or administer property "regardless of whether some or even a majority of the parishes in the diocese might decide not to remain in the Episcopal Church of the United States of America."

After the 2008 diocesan convention vote, Calvary Episcopal Church asked James to enforce his 2005 order.

In his Oct. 6 opinion James said that "regardless of what name the defendants now call themselves, they are not the Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh of the Episcopal Church of the United States of America." He ruled that the Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh "did not cease to exist" after the 2008 convention vote because it was created by the Episcopal Church and the church now recognizes that those Episcopalians who did not follow Duncan now make up the Episcopal Church's continuing diocese.

The property held by or administered by the Pittsburgh diocese has been reviewed and evaluated by a "special master" James appointed two days before Duncan's removal as a bishop of the Episcopal Church. The special master, Pittsburgh attorney Stanley E. Levine and the Campbell & Levine law firm, gave James an inventory of the property involved in the suit on Jan. 27. James said in his order two days later that his acceptance of the inventory does not preclude other property being added to his order.

All of the public documents in the 2003 case including the Jan. 29 order are available here.

-- The Rev. Mary Frances Schjonberg is Episcopal News Service national correspondent.

DIOCESE OF NORTHERN MICHIGAN BEGINS BISHOP SEARCH PROCESS

DIOCESE OF NORTHERN MICHIGAN BEGINS BISHOP SEARCH PROCESS

Annual Convention Discusses Past Year, Passes New Resolution

MARQUETTE, Mi., November 2, 2009—

The Diocese of Northern Michigan approved a new process for selecting its next bishop at its recently concluded convention at St. Stephen’s Episcopal Church in Escanaba, Mi.
After lengthy discussion, the convention approved a resolution that adopted a search plan that includes:

Forming a search committee engaged in discernment;

Building on the work of the previous search committee (known as the Episcopal Ministry Discernment Team);

Communicating effectively with the wider church;

Exploring the possibility of working with a search consultant;

Using a broad process to collect the names of potential candidates;

Intending to present multiple candidates to the electing convention;

Using the petition process for adding names to the slate.An amendment to remove the petition process from the search was defeated after two visitors—the Rt. Rev. William D. Persell, retired Bishop of Chicago and assisting bishop in the Diocese of Ohio, and the Rev. Canon Cindy Voorhees of the Diocese of Los Angeles—urged the delegates to preserve the right to submit petition nominees.“The petition process provides insurance against a search process gone awry,” said Bishop Persell. “It also provides assurance to the wider church that you intend to elect your next bishop in an open and transparent way.”

The search committee will be comprised of two members selected by each of the diocese’s four geographic regions; one member from the Diocesan Council; and one from the Standing Committee. The Standing Committee may also appoint up to three members to ensure that the search committee is representative of the diocese. The search committee will likely begin its work in February 2010.

Persell and Voorhees were among five visitors from across the Church who attended the convention to offer support to the diocese, which has been without a bishop since the Rt. Rev. James Kelsey was killed in an automobile accident while returning from a visitation in June 2007.

The diocese’s previous search for a bishop ended in July when the Rev. Kevin Thew Forrester, a priest of the diocese, did not receive the necessary consents from the wider Church.

Bishop Tom Ray, who preceded Bishop Kelsey, now serves as Northern Michigan’s assisting bishop. “Bishop Ray has been our rock through all of this,” said Linda Piper, chair of the diocese’s Standing Committee.

On the first night of the convention, the Very Rev. Ernesto Medina, Dean for Urban Mission at Trinity Cathedral in Omaha and clergy deputy from the Diocese of Nebraska, led the convention in a process he developed called “Authority of Generations.” Convention attendees, in small groups, told stories and sang hymns that answered the question, “Where have you experienced God in the past year?” In summarizing the stories told, Medina said, “Fear and painful losses lead to calmness, and to God being present in the transitions of our life. Through our loss we find God’s spirit speaking through us.”

Dr. Fredrica Harris Thompsett, Mary Wolfe Professor Emerita of Historical Theology at Episcopal Divinity School, was the convention’s chaplain.

The Diocese of Northern Michigan, founded in 1895, comprises 27 congregations in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. For more information about the diocese, please visit the diocesan website.

A new homophobic law in Uganda

Uganda's draconian anti-homosexuality bill has the potential to destroy thousands of lives. The church must speak up


Every day millions of Christians pray to be spared from being put to the test. For some in Uganda, where an anti-homosexuality bill (pdf) is being put to parliament, this prayer may be especially deeply felt. This extremely unpleasant proposed law targets not only lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered (LGBT) people but also human rights and Aids prevention activists and people in positions of trust. While some in the church are backing the bill, other Christians face a challenge to the principles at the heart of their faith.
Seventeen local and international human rights groups, including Sexual Minorities Uganda, have condemned the move. "This draft bill is clearly an attempt to divide and weaken civil society by striking at one of its most marginalised groups. The government may be starting here, but who will be next?" said Scott Long of Human Rights Watch. Gay sex is already illegal in Uganda, and can result in long prison sentences. The bill broadens the definition to include any form of sexual relations between people of the same sex, which could result in life imprisonment, and threatens those guilty of "promotion of homosexuality" with up to seven years in prison, an attack on freedom of expression which would also damage Aids prevention efforts.
A new offence of "aggravated homosexuality" would carry the death penalty, covering sex with someone under 18 or who is disabled or in the case of a "serial offender". This also undermines the right of disabled adults capable of informed consent to enjoy intimate relationships, insultingly reducing them to the status of "victims". Any "person in authority" aware of an offence under the new law who did not report it to the authorities could face three years' imprisonment, including anyone who exercises "religious, political, economic or social authority". So a pastor who found out that someone in his congregation or community was gay or lesbian would be required to betray that person to possible imprisonment or death, or risk his own freedom. The bill would not only destroy LGBT people but also undermine others' integrity and humanity.
The law would apply not only within Uganda but also to Ugandans abroad. Some commentators believe it is being used to divert attention from ongoing social problems and intensify repression in the run-up to the next elections.
The bill is a particular challenge for Christians because clergy have helped to whip up fear and hatred and undermine respect for human rights. Nicodemus Okille, Dean of the Province of Uganda, in his Christmas sermon in 2007 as Bishop of Bukedi, reportedly condemned advocates of gay rights as having no place in the kingdom of God. "The team of homosexuals is very rich," claimed Archbishop Henry Orombi in 2008. "They have money and will do whatever it takes to make sure that this vice penetrates Africa. We have to stand out and say no to them." However Anglican Bishop Stanley Ntagali of Masindi-Kitara diocese has recently spoken out against the death penalty for homosexuality, while supporting imprisonment.
The bill also poses a challenge to those throughout the world with economic, social or political links to Uganda. This includes Christian leaders overseas who have helped to give credibility to homophobic Ugandan bishops and pastors while supposedly proclaiming a message of love and justice for all. Some US evangelists have endorsed Pastor Martin Ssempa, an anti-LGBT crusader. Anglican leaders such as the Archbishop of Canterbury have avoided challenging their Ugandan associates' complicity in anti-LGBT abuses while soundly condemning Anglican provinces moving towards equality for all.
Sixty years ago, the Anglican Communion was at the forefront of the drive for universal human rights. Though commitment to rights for all, including LGBT people, has been repeatedly endorsed at international gatherings, and many churches are passionately committed, it now tends to be referred to in vague terms by top leaders. But they will have to decide how to respond to this legislation, especially since their own Ugandan-born clergy and parishioners will be affected. What they do, or fail to do, will affect their ability to witness to a God who does not abandon the abused and exploited. These are testing times.

Episcopal Dissenters: It’s OK to Hate Gays

by Tommi Avicolli-Mecca‚ Oct. 27‚ 2009

Even when a religious denomination is trying to make right of a centuries-old wrong, you can count on some of its followers to run screaming in the opposite direction. Such is the case with the Episcopal Diocese of South Carolina, which is based in Charleston.

The Diocese, which covers the southern and eastern half of the state, recently voted to not only oppose its mother church’s decision to ordain gay priests and bless gay marriages, but also to cease participation in most of the national group’s activities.

It’s a severing of ties but not quite a split, more like a protest against what the dissenting conservatives see as “assenting to actions deemed contrary to holy scripture...until such bodies show a willingness to repent of such actions.”

"The only model that's been out there for us has either been leave or acquiesce, and that hasn't been working," the Diocese’s Bishop Mark Lawrence told the Associated Press. "We need to get the 30,000 members of the Episcopal Diocese of South Carolina awakened to the challenges before us. ... Once we have done that, then the question is how do we engage the larger Episcopal Church?"

The South Carolina Diocese is not the first to express its extreme displeasure with its church’s pro-gay actions. Almost a year-and-a-half ago, four dioceses formed the Anglican Church in North America, a new national group. Other anti-gay parishes have since joined.

The unhappy South Carolina Episcopalians also rejected a resolution putting the Diocese on record against anti-gay discrimination. “This Diocese will not condone or deny the dignity of any person, including but not limited to, those who believe themselves to be gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgendered,” the unsuccessful resolution read.

So the bigots in the Diocese of South Carolina aren’t even willing to temper their anti-gay stance on ordination and marriage with a statement that they value the worth and dignity of all human beings, including queers?

Why try to dress up prejudice with liberal talk about the dignity of people you hate? Why say you love the sin and hate the sinner, when, in reality, you hate the sinner, too.

It’s obvious that these South Carolina Episcopalians are intolerant. They don’t want their clergy to be out queers, and they don’t want gay marriage recognized in any way, shape or form. They want their church the way it used to be, unanimous in its condemnation of queers. They obviously long for the bad old days when “the love that dare not speak its name” had steel doors on its closet, and anyone caught doing what comes naturally was thrown in jail.

At least they’re honest bigots.

Tommi Avicolli Mecca is co-editor of Avanti Popolo: Italians Sailing Beyond Columbus, and editor of Smash the Church, Smash the State: The Early Years of Gay Liberation, which has been nominated for an American Library Association award. His website is www.avicollimecca.com.

Diocese of Fort worth to orain first woman to priesthood

Some very good news about the changes that are happening in Fort Worth.

The Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth was long known as one of the most conservative in the Episcopal Church, and one measure was the refusal by its bishops to ordain women to the priesthood.

When a large majority of clergy and lay delegates of the diocese voted to follow Bishop Jack Iker's recommendation and leave the Episcopal Church, that split the diocese into churches leaving the denomination (most of them) and those choosing to stay.
The group choosing to stay has long wanted to ordain women to the priesthood - and that will finally happen in Fort Worth this Sunday. Deacon Susan Slaughter will be the history-maker. Details in the press release below:

Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth to Ordain First Woman to Priesthood
It is with great rejoicing that we make the following announcement.
Thirty-three years after the Episcopal Church approved the ordination of women to the priesthood and episcopate, the first woman will be ordained a priest in the Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth.

At 5:00 P.M. on Sunday Nov. 15 in St. Luke's in the Meadow Episcopal Church in the Diocese of Fort Worth, the Rt. Rev. Edwin F. [Ted] Gulick Jr. will ordain Deacon Susan Slaughter to the priesthood.

She will be the first woman ordained to the priesthood in the history of the Fort Worth diocese, which was founded in 1983. The Rev. Ms. Slaughter also will be the first woman rector of a parish in the diocese. The Episcopal Church approved women's ordination to the priesthood and episcopate in 1976 and the first women were ordained priests in January 1977.

When Susan Slaughter was 8 years old, two friends, independently of each other, invited her to go to St. Mark's Episcopal Church in Houston, TX.

"I loved the liturgy, joined the junior choir and was confirmed at age 12. I was the first in my family to attend and be confirmed in the Episcopal Church," she said. She soon brought her parents and brothers into the church with her.

She graduated from Bellaire High School and received a Bachelor of Arts in Teaching in Speech Pathology and Audiology from Sam Houston State University in Huntsville, TX. She married Jerry Slaughter and then went on to get a Master of Education in Guidance and Counseling from North Texas State University in Denton, TX. Susan and Jerry each had two children when they married. When Jerry died in 2007 they had been married for 28 years. Susan has seven grandchildren.

She completed seminary training at the Anglican School of Theology, Dallas, TX and is currently enrolled in the Master of Theological Studies at Brite Divinity School at Texas Christian University, Fort Worth, TX. For the past several years, she has served as deacon at St. Luke's in the Meadow. Her leadership and ministry helped stabilize that parish through the rocky time prior to the departure of the former bishop and other diocesan leaders and in the transition time after their departure in November 2008 and before the diocese was reorganized in February 2009.

She began sensing a call to the ordained ministry in the 1980s when she became actively involved in lay ministry at her home parish of St. Alban's Episcopal Church in Arlington, TX.
"Before initiating Stephen Ministry in my parish, I began noticing an internal struggle regarding my possible call to ordination," she said. The Stephen Ministry trains and organizes lay people to provide one-to-one Christian care to hurting people in and around their congregations.

She talked with her rector. But no matter how supportive her rector may have been neither Bishop A. Donald Davies nor his successors Clarence Pope and Jack Iker would ordain women to the priesthood. So she developed the Stephen Ministry program, served as lay reader and server, led women's Bible studies and taught adult Christian Education.

"Believing I was particularly suited to coordinate, train and supervise Stephen Ministry, I attempted to rationalize my not pursuing ordination. When I could no longer deny the persistent drawing, I met with Bishop Pope. In my particular diocese women were not candidates for ordination to the priesthood. Once again, I tried to push aside the sense of call," she said.

After eleven years of taking seminary courses for her own edification and continuing her discernment process, she met with Jack Iker, the newly consecrated bishop.

"He pointed me in the direction of another diocese. Circumstances prevented me from entertaining the possibility of relocating," she said.

When she learned women could be ordained deacons in the Fort Worth diocese, she again tried to discern the nature of her ministry. Eventually she returned to Iker believing that her call must be to the diaconate. She was ordained a deacon on Oct. 12, 2002. But over time the realization grew that her call was to the priesthood. After Bp. Gulick was elected, she visited with him and he and the Commission on Ministry agreed she was called to the priesthood.

"It is with a deep sense of awe in the mysterious ways of our Lord that I arrive at this moment. I am filled with gratitude toward those persons, lay and clergy, who have encouraged and supported me over the years. St. Luke's in the Meadow has been especially supportive and has helped me discern more clearly my true vocation," she said.

This day was a long time coming. Indeed, had the Rev. Ms. Slaughter lived in any other diocese, she would most likely have been ordained a priest years ago. The long awaited fulfillment of her call adds a deep sweetness to the day.

History of women's ordination in diocese

The Diocese of Fort Worth was formed from the western part of the Diocese of Dallas, in part out of opposition to the ordination of women to the priesthood. The founding bishop, A. Donald Davies, and both his successors, Clarence C. Pope and Jack L. Iker, all left the Episcopal Church over women's ordination. Under those bishops, women feeling called to the priesthood either had to give up their call or leave the diocese to be ordained elsewhere. At least fifteen women have done so--and all have been invited "home" for the ordination.

The diocese reorganized after Iker's departure and elected Bishop Gulick as provisional bishop in February. Under his leadership two women priests have been licensed to serve in the diocese--the Rev. Ms. Maurine Lewis who retired to Fort Worth from the Diocese of Milwaukee in 2008 and does supply work among the displaced parishes; and the Rev. Ms. Melanie R. Barbarito, who was hired in August by All Saints Episcopal Church in Fort Worth as parochial associate for evangelism and engagement. She came to Fort Worth from the Diocese of Missouri. She is the first woman to be hired on the staff of a parish here.

But the Rev. Ms. Slaughter is the first woman from this diocese to be ordained a priest, an event that marks a historic turning point in the life of diocese and perhaps more than any other one event, signals what a new day it is in the Diocese of Fort Worth.

A second woman, Deacon ClayOla Gitane, will be ordained on Dec. 5 at Trinity Episcopal Church in Fort Worth by the Rt. Rev. Bavi Edna "Nedi" Rivera of the Diocese of Olympia. The Rev. Ms. Gitane began the process while Jack Iker was bishop. He refused to ordain women to the priesthood and so she had to leave the diocese to pursue her call. This will be the first time a female bishop has performed an episcopal act in the Diocese of Fort Worth.

John Stewart gives his take on the Vatican's move toward dissident Episcopalians

Best line " that is Anglican for go f&*k yourself"

The Daily Show With Jon Stewart	Mon - Thurs 11p / 10c
Ecce No Homo
http://www.thedailyshow.com/
Daily Show Full Episodes Political Humor Health Care Crisis

Syndney taken to court over deacons presiding at communion

There's a new development in the continuing story of the Diocese of Sydney's decision to allow deacons to "celebrate" the Holy Eucharist as a way of avoiding having to ordain women to the priesthood. According to news reports in Australia a church court has been convened to hear a suit brought against Sydney by other Australian bishops.

"Eight diocesan bishops from Wangaratta, Bathurst, Bunbury, Riverina, Rockhampton, Grafton, North Queensland and Willochra, and 20 clergy and laity from 13 dioceses around the country outside of Sydney have applied for a legal ruling.
The tribunal, headed by the Appeal Court judge and leading Sydney Anglican Peter Young, conducted a preliminary hearing on August 20 and is awaiting submissions from interested parties.

The legal manoeuvres come less than a year after Sydney's parliament stared down strident opposition from leading Australian Anglicans and the worldwide church to widen the role of deacons.

The Sydney synod also gave support for Dr Jensen to amend the licences of senior church elders to preside over Holy Communion, at the risk of antagonising its conservative allies in the global church who are opposed to gay bishops and lay presidency. Dr Jensen says it's a right he will not take up."

Bishop Spong is done debating!!

The time has come indeed. Thank you Bishop Spong.

A Manifesto! The Time Has Come!



I have made a decision. I will no longer debate the issue of
homosexuality in the church with anyone. I will no longer engage the biblical
ignorance that emanates from so many right-wing Christians about how the Bible
condemns homosexuality, as if that point of view still has any credibility. I
will no longer discuss with them or listen to them tell me how homosexuality is
"an abomination to God," about how homosexuality is a "chosen lifestyle," or
about how through prayer and "spiritual counseling" homosexual persons can be
"cured." Those arguments are no longer worthy of my time or energy. I will no
longer dignify by listening to the thoughts of those who advocate "reparative
therapy," as if homosexual persons are somehow broken and need to be repaired. I
will no longer talk to those who believe that the unity of the church can or
should be achieved by rejecting the presence of, or at least at the expense of,
gay and lesbian people. I will no longer take the time to refute the unlearned
and undocumentable claims of certain world religious leaders who call
homosexuality "deviant." I will no longer listen to that pious sentimentality
that certain Christian leaders continue to employ, which suggests some version
of that strange and overtly dishonest phrase that "we love the sinner but hate
the sin." That statement is, I have concluded, nothing more than a self-serving
lie designed to cover the fact that these people hate homosexual persons and
fear homosexuality itself, but somehow know that hatred is incompatible with the
Christ they claim to profess, so they adopt this face-saving and absolutely
false statement. I will no longer temper my understanding of truth in order to
pretend that I have even a tiny smidgen of respect for the appalling negativity
that continues to emanate from religious circles where the church has for
centuries conveniently perfumed its ongoing prejudices against blacks, Jews,
women and homosexual persons with what it assumes is "high-sounding, pious
rhetoric." The day for that mentality has quite simply come to an end for me. I
will personally neither tolerate it nor listen to it any longer. The world has
moved on, leaving these elements of the Christian Church that cannot adjust to
new knowledge or a new consciousness lost in a sea of their own irrelevance.
They no longer talk to anyone but themselves. I will no longer seek to slow down
the witness to inclusiveness by pretending that there is some middle ground
between prejudice and oppression. There isn't. Justice postponed is justice
denied. That can be a resting place no longer for anyone. An old civil rights
song proclaimed that the only choice awaiting those who cannot adjust to a new
understanding was to "Roll on over or we'll roll on over you!" Time waits for no
one.



I will particularly ignore those members of my own Episcopal Church who
seek to break away from this body to form a "new church," claiming that this new
and bigoted instrument alone now represents the Anglican Communion. Such a new
ecclesiastical body is designed to allow these pathetic human beings, who are so
deeply locked into a world that no longer exists, to form a community in which
they can continue to hate gay people, distort gay people with their hopeless
rhetoric and to be part of a religious fellowship in which they can continue to
feel justified in their homophobic prejudices for the rest of their tortured
lives. Church unity can never be a virtue that is preserved by allowing
injustice, oppression and psychological tyranny to go unchallenged.
In my
personal life, I will no longer listen to televised debates conducted by
"fair-minded" channels that seek to give "both sides" of this issue "equal
time." I am aware that these stations no longer give equal time to the advocates
of treating women as if they are the property of men or to the advocates of
reinstating either segregation or slavery, despite the fact that when these evil
institutions were coming to an end the Bible was still being quoted frequently
on each of these subjects. It is time for the media to announce that there are
no longer two sides to the issue of full humanity for gay and lesbian people.
There is no way that justice for homosexual people can be compromised any
longer.



I will no longer act as if the Papal office is to be respected if the
present occupant of that office is either not willing or not able to inform and
educate himself on public issues on which he dares to speak with embarrassing
ineptitude. I will no longer be respectful of the leadership of the Archbishop
of Canterbury, who seems to believe that rude behavior, intolerance and even
killing prejudice is somehow acceptable, so long as it comes from third-world
religious leaders, who more than anything else reveal in themselves the price
that colonial oppression has required of the minds and hearts of so many of our
world's population. I see no way that ignorance and truth can be placed side by
side, nor do I believe that evil is somehow less evil if the Bible is quoted to
justify it. I will dismiss as unworthy of any more of my attention the wild,
false and uninformed opinions of such would-be religious leaders as Pat
Robertson, James Dobson, Jerry Falwell, Jimmy Swaggart, Albert Mohler, and
Robert Duncan. My country and my church have both already spent too much time,
energy and money trying to accommodate these backward points of view when they
are no longer even tolerable.



I make these statements because it is time to move on. The battle is
over. The victory has been won. There is no reasonable doubt as to what the
final outcome of this struggle will be. Homosexual people will be accepted as
equal, full human beings, who have a legitimate claim on every right that both
church and society have to offer any of us. Homosexual marriages will become
legal, recognized by the state and pronounced holy by the church. "Don't ask,
don't tell" will be dismantled as the policy of our armed forces. We will and we
must learn that equality of citizenship is not something that should ever be
submitted to a referendum. Equality under and before the law is a solemn promise
conveyed to all our citizens in the Constitution itself. Can any of us imagine
having a public referendum on whether slavery should continue, whether
segregation should be dismantled, whether voting privileges should be offered to
women? The time has come for politicians to stop hiding behind unjust laws that
they themselves helped to enact, and to abandon that convenient shield of
demanding a vote on the rights of full citizenship because they do not
understand the difference between a constitutional democracy, which this nation
has, and a "mobocracy," which this nation rejected when it adopted its
constitution. We do not put the civil rights of a minority to the vote of a
plebiscite.



I will also no longer act as if I need a majority vote of some
ecclesiastical body in order to bless, ordain, recognize and celebrate the lives
and gifts of gay and lesbian people in the life of the church. No one should
ever again be forced to submit the privilege of citizenship in this nation or
membership in the Christian Church to the will of a majority vote.



The battle in both our culture and our church to rid our souls of this
dying prejudice is finished. A new consciousness has arisen. A decision has
quite clearly been made. Inequality for gay and lesbian people is no longer a
debatable issue in either church or state. Therefore, I will from this moment on
refuse to dignify the continued public expression of ignorant prejudice by
engaging it. I do not tolerate racism or sexism any longer. From this moment on,
I will no longer tolerate our culture's various forms of homophobia. I do not
care who it is who articulates these attitudes or who tries to make them sound
holy with religious jargon.



I have been part of this debate for years, but things do get settled
and this issue is now settled for me. I do not debate any longer with members of
the "Flat Earth Society" either. I do not debate with people who think we should
treat epilepsy by casting demons out of the epileptic person; I do not waste
time engaging those medical opinions that suggest that bleeding the patient
might release the infection. I do not converse with people who think that
Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans as punishment for the sin of being the
birthplace of Ellen DeGeneres or that the terrorists hit the United Sates on
9/11 because we tolerated homosexual people, abortions, feminism or the American
Civil Liberties Union. I am tired of being embarrassed by so much of my church's
participation in causes that are quite unworthy of the Christ I serve or the God
whose mystery and wonder I appreciate more each day. Indeed I feel the Christian
Church should not only apologize, but do public penance for the way we have
treated people of color, women, adherents of other religions and those we
designated heretics, as well as gay and lesbian people.



Life moves on. As the poet James Russell Lowell once put it more than a
century ago: "New occasions teach new duties, Time makes ancient good uncouth."
I am ready now to claim the victory. I will from now on assume it and live into
it. I am unwilling to argue about it or to discuss it as if there are two
equally valid, competing positions any longer. The day for that mentality has
simply gone forever.



This is my manifesto and my creed. I proclaim it today. I invite others
to join me in this public declaration. I believe that such a public outpouring
will help cleanse both the church and this nation of its own distorting past. It
will restore integrity and honor to both church and state. It will signal that a
new day has dawned and we are ready not just to embrace it, but also to rejoice
in it and to celebrate it.
– John Shelby Spong