Oh! What a Tangled Web We Weave

There are now charges that "those evil lib'rals" have engaged in a cyber war.

It seems that once John-David Schofield had resigned as the Bishop of San Joaquin, and was then deposed by the House of Bishops, the Anglican Communion's Provincial Directory was edited to list the See of San Joaquin as "vacant." (A side note: the See was listed as "vacant" a few months ago, but after much wailing and gnashing of teeth by the rejectionists, John-David Schofield's name was restored to the listing. The current "vacant" listing is a recent change.) This establishes that as far as the Anglican Communion is concerned, whatever it is that John-David Schofield is leading, it is not the Diocese listed in that directory.

Once the Diocese was re-established at last weekend's Diocesan Convention, another change occurred. The Society of Archbishop Justus, which operates the domain "anglican.org", redirected "sanjoaquin.anglican.org" from the website of John-David Schofield’s Southern Cone group to the website of the official Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin.

Now there is a new round of wailing and gnashing of teeth commencing, but that's not what intrigues me about these changes. What I find fascinating is a little detail pointed out to me by dr. primrose in the comments.

You may recall the former Standing Committee of the Diocese of San Joaquin, who were "not recognized" by our Presiding Bishop. They responded to our Presiding Bishop with much bluster, but refused to answer the critical question; are they Episcopalians, or are they part of John-David Schofield's breakaway group? Since then, the numbers of this former group have shrunk to three, since half of their members finally declared that they have left TEC. At least they had the integrity to end the guessing game regarding their allegiance.

At last weekend's Convention, Robert Eaton, a former member of the Standing Committee, voiced his objections. He has published those objections on a website entitled "Surrounded: A weblog of the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin". Here is his statement:

Regarding the election of Standing Committee members (and similarly of General Convention delegates), I come before you to simply state that I object to and protest the election of any new Standing Committee member who would in effect replace me, a diocesan Standing Committee member (and any Standing Committee member) validly and duly elected at the December 2007 Diocesan Convention (and prior conventions). I have not, nor did I ever leave the (Episcopal) Church, nor have I acted in such a way as to repudiate my place in the Church.

The Rev. Robert G. Eaton, Clergy Delegate by Canonical Residency
Standing Committee Member, elected to 4-year term, December 2007 Diocesan Convention
Rector
St. John Parish, Tulare

So, it appears that Robert Eaton, who is the adminstrator of the website "Surrounded," has declared that he is an Episcopalian and claims to have not "acted in such a way as to repudiate my place in the Church."

If that is so, then I find a very curious thing on the "About" page for that weblog he administers. Here is the text:

The Diocese of San Joaquin is a part of the Episcopal Church in the United States of America. The diocesan office - the office of the bishop - is in Fresno, on the grounds of St. James Cathedral. The diocese currently stretches from just south of Sacramento, to the top of the Grapevine, south of Bakersfield; from west of I-5 including Coalinga and Los Banos, to the Nevada border.

This weblog is an offical part of the communications for and by the diocese. It is administered by the Rev. Robert Eaton, the Rector of St. John Parish in Tulare.

For further information on the diocese please view the diocesan website, at http://www.sjoaquin.net/ .

If you click on the link at the end of that entry, it will take you to the webpage of an organization claiming to be a diocese of the Southern Cone, not the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin.

Accidental? Just needs updating? I don't think so. I was on that site just last week. I even left a rather snarky comment, which Rob removed. I happened to check out the "About" page, and noticed that the link was to "sanjoaquin.anglican.org," which was formerly the address of this Southern Cone group. I found it curious at the time that a website declaring itself to be "Episcopalian" would be directing readers to a breakaway group, but thought maybe it simply had not been updated.

But here's the fascinating thing; since the change of website addresses occurred over this last weekend, that means that Rob Eaton has recently, within the last few days, edited that link so that it would continue to direct readers to the Southern Cone site.

So, what to make of this? It appears Robert Eaton claims to be an Episcopalian, but belongs to a Southern Cone group, and continues to encourage visitors to the weblog he adminsters, through an unethical subterfuge, to join this breakaway group.

And yet he expects to be recognized as a faithful member of the Episcopal Church? I think not.

J.

UPDATE: 4/1/08 - Sometime today, the "About" page for the weblog "Surrounded" was edited. It now includes two links; one to the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin, and one to a Southern Cone organization.

Leaving a link to a breakaway group is still somewhat unusual for a site whose administrator has recently made very public claims of being an Episcopalian. But it is an improvement from this, which is what that page looked like yesterday.

Looking Toward the Future

One more pic, this time from lost-sheep:


Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori with a present member and future leader of the Episcopal Church at Christ the King, Riverbank, California on Sunday, March 30.

San Joaquin's New Beginning

One final look at today's wonderful celebrations in San Joaquin.

From Dr. Val:

Our Integrity display at the convention drew quite a few people. We ran through about 80 information packets. Some had heard of Integrity, many had not. We listened to many stories; some of loss, alienation and abuse, and others of hope, resilience and a desire to organize. There were lots of questions about the “cause” of sexual orientation (Is it genetic or what?), how to talk to people about sexual orientation, and how to organize displays for local Pride events. To a person, everyone was respectful, if not right out supportive. It was also clear that most of the human sexuality discussions the church has engaged in over the past 2 decades skipped right over this valley.

It was a great experience to be at a church event with so much positive energy. There’s rather a lot of difficult business to get through in the coming months. Please pray for continued positive energy and well-being for us as we move forward…

From Scott:

I have just been to the most joyful diocesan convention I have ever experienced. I am still floating, so I'll make this short (otherwise I'll go all "flowery"). If you want hope, joy, love and hospitality, come to the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin. The liturgies over these last 24 hours have been punctuated by many "Alleluia!'s". If you want to hear them shouted with pure confidence, come to the Episcoapal Diocese of San Joaquin.

From Fresno Mark:

Well, I won't even try to give a blow-by-blow report from today. Others (including the official news reporters) can do it much better. Instead, I will offer a few "snapshots" of this glorious day...

... Singing on the bus on the way from Fresno to Lodi a bucket of praise and worthy classics, and feeling, as the song says, that "Surely the Presence of the Lord is in this place"

... Seeing a table full of vestments, altar linens, etc. etc., with unpacked boxes below the table, all of which had been donated by people from around the country to give, for free, to our emerging congregations.

... An "Integrity" table. In the Diocese of San Joaquin!

... Seeing the tables set up with information from programs that had never had an audience in the Diocese of San Joaquin in the past. Taking away a stack of brochures for Education for Ministry (EFM) so that I can get this program up and running at Holy Family church in Fresno.

... Hearing the unanimous "yeas" and not a single "nay" as the convention voted to undue the problems of the Schofield era and move on with a new bishop.

... Seeing Fr. Rob Eaton of the old standing committee present his objection to the proceedings. Although I didn't agree with him at all, he was respectful and earnest. And he was there.

... Being present at the enthronement Eucharist. Nobody does this kind of thing better than the Episcopal Church. It was a full stop affair, with all the smells, bells and midget races (i.e., incense, bells, and acolytes running around).

... Hearing the congregation positively shout out their responses at the Eucharist. You've never heard such loud "alleluias" or "we will with God's helps".

... The humble modesty of Bishop Lamb.

... The reception line at the end of the Eucharist with +Jefferts Schori signing autographs like a rock star.

... The wonderful sermons by +Lamb and +Jefferts Schori that left all of us charged up and ready to take on the heavy tasks ahead of us.

All in all, a glorious day. ALLELUIA!

From Beryl:

Oh my gosh, it was a wonderful day. I am so impressed with our Presiding Bishop Kathryn Jefferts Schori. She has such a gracious and calm demeanor, and yet there is a significant, strong spiritual strength about her. (I will not say she is a godly woman, although she is as close to such as I have ever seen. However, I have a problem with the idea of godly priests and bishops, as I belive they are all just people with the same baptismal covenant we have, only their charge is greater, to look after the sheep, and so many seem to forget that charge.) May I say that her manner of dress for the Eucharistic service was elegant, (and I say that because of past comments I have heard.) I wish I had a picture for you. Her spouse led a session at noon for spouses of clergy. I wasn't part of that group, but they looked very engrossed in their discussion when I was returning from lunch. The presiding bishop's husband is a friendly, gracious man, who introduced himself to me and to others in the line for lunch.

There are so many plans for the future, and truly, there are great hopes to reach out to others in a spirit of reconciliation. Whatever happens, I believe that the REAL EPISCOPAL CHURCH has returned to the Diocese of San Joaquin, and I love it.

Oh, and on top of everything else, I met Fred Scwartz and Scott Hankins!! What a day it has been!

From Fred:

To all my Jake's place friends and family I say Alleluia! The Lord is Risen Indeed! It is indeed interesting to meet folks from this great place on a face to face basis. We had visitors from Connecticut, Hawaii, New Mexico (I'll let you guess who that is), Nevada, Washington, ALASKA! for heaven sakes, and from Arizona as well as Diocese of California, No. California, El Camino Real, Los Angeles and San Diego.

Bishop Rivera's daughter (not the Bishop, the other daughter) spoke to us at lunch and passed on what she thought her father might want us to know o nthis glorious day!

Can I get a WOWSERS!!!

Fred also sent along a few more pics:

From Aghaveagh:

aghaveagh, reporting in!

(no wi-fi at the convention, so unlike Fresno Mark, I had to wait till I got home)

Just some impressions--I'll report at length later, with pix, on my blog (tired out from the long drive home).

First off, what a joyous crowd! The first convention in three years where the only tears I've shed as a delegate have been those of joy.

Getting to meet Beryl and Leslie was an honor. They are just as gracious and charming in person as they are in their postings online.

Seeing the new missions and the new priests (many of them women!!) welcomed in! Women priests?? San Joaquin???

As Grace Episcopal, Bakersfield was announced, they all brought out their t-shirts--one parishioner ran up and presented one to the PB.

Father Mark Hall's deadpan humor.

Shaking Father Eaton's hand and telling him I was glad he was there. Wishing that Father Snell had come.

Getting my picture taken with the PB like a star-struck fan.

The most glorious Eucharist, with trumpet and organ music.

Hearing the first sermon of our new bishop and the enthusiastic responses at his seating. (He said that he had seated KJS, and now she was seating him! Musical chairs???)

Knowing that all of you were rejoicing with us! Thank you and good night!

And yet another story from Episcopal Life:

A jubilant celebration of Holy Eucharist concluded the March 29 special convention in the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin and made official Bishop Jerry Lamb's role as provisional bishop.

"What you have been about and what I have been about these last months, weeks, days, even hours is not really about building a new diocesan structure," Lamb said during his sermon. "As I understand it, what we are about is the proclamation of the Good News that Jesus is the Christ and that we do this from within the base of our Episcopal and Anglican tradition because that's who we are: members of the Episcopal Church and members of the Anglican church."

Most of the more than 400 people who attended the convention remained for the Eucharist. Individuals from the Episcopal dioceses of Alaska, Arizona, California, Connecticut, El Camino Real, Hawaii, Los Angeles, Nevada, Northern California, Rio Grande, San Diego and Olympia also attended.

Half of the offertory was assigned to Lamb's discretionary fund and the other half, Lamb told the congregation to loud and sustained applause, would be given to the Diocese of Louisiana, which continues to rebuild after hurricanes Katrina and Rita...

...Earlier, during his sermon, Lamb had told the congregation that the work in which they were engaged is "not about who your bishop is."

"It is about how you and I will rebuild this Episcopal diocese so that at its core it will proclaim and live the Gospel or Jesus Christ," he said. "The diocese must have its roots firmly in Christ Jesus and live out the baptismal promises we all have renewed in one way or another this past week"...

Now, I know there's still a lot of work to be done,but tonight I feel more at peace about the future of San Joaquin than I have in many years. It's almost as if I can feel the fresh breeze of God's Holy Spirit gently flowing through that valley from all the way over here in New Jersey! Thanks be to God!

Now we need to bring this day to a close. To keep from having someone disrupt the spirit of today's conversations, I'm going to moderate comments for awhile. Besides, don't you all have to get up early for church tomorrow? Go to bed!

The Lord Almighty grant us a peaceful night and a perfect
end. Amen.

Psalm 31

In you, O LORD, have I taken refuge;
let me never be put to shame: *
deliver me in your righteousness.

Incline your ear to me; *
make haste to deliver me.

Be my strong rock, a castle to keep me safe,
for you are my crag and my stronghold; *
for the sake of your Name, lead me and guide me.

Take me out of the net that they have secretly set for me, *
for you are my tower of strength.

Into your hands I commend my spirit, *
for you have redeemed me,
O LORD, O God of truth.

Be present, O merciful God, and protect us through the hours
of this night, so that we who are wearied by the changes and
chances of this life may rest in your eternal changelessness;
through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

J.

San Joaquin: "We're Back!"

The first summary of the day's events was offered by Fred:

Hi, it is now lunch and we are almost finished with business. It is/was hard to describe. Things went very well. Rob Eaton showed up with 2 parishioners/vestry and complained. We listened respectfully. +Lamb is now the provisional bishop for EDoSJ. C and C rolled back to 2003. New SC and DC elected. Eucharist and seating to happen around 2. More later.

Fred also sent this candid shot of the Bishops:



We then received this brief note from Fresno Mark:

All is well. All shall be well. It has been a wonderful day. The Eucharist and enthronement of Bishop Lamb is about to start. Keep you prayers ascending with us at this joyous time.

From Episcopal Life:

The members of the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin March 29 chose their provisional bishop and other officers, and passed organizing resolutions during a convention filled with cheers and applause, and rooted in the message of resurrection.

"I am awed by the opportunity" that the Diocese of San Joaquin has to transform itself, said Nancy Key, a member of the steering committee that worked towards the convening of the special convention, during a lunch break. The diocese has "a lot of momentum" that can now be channeled into concrete action, she added.

Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori opened the convention at the Episcopal Church of St. John the Baptist in Lodi, California, with Morning Prayer.

The rest of the Episcopal Church "stand[s] with you in the firm and constant hope that this body will grow and flourish and bless the Central Valley of California in ways you have not yet dreamed of," the Presiding Bishop later told the convention.

When then-acting Convention Secretary the Rev. Deacon Susanne Ward called roll of the diocese's congregations, 18 of 47 responded, accounting for 43 lay delegates and 21 clergy. More than 400 people attended the convention.

Clergy delegates were asked to sign an oath of conformity to the Episcopal Church, similar to that which they were required to sign at their ordination. Lay delegates signed an oath the echoed the Baptismal Covenant. Nominees for diocesan offices also had to sign the oath.

The convention accepted without debate Jefferts Schori's recommendation of Jerry Lamb as provisional bishop of the diocese...

There were a few objections raised:

...The call to elect a new Standing Committee drew protest from the Rev. Robert Eaton, rector of St. John's Episcopal Parish in Tulare, California, and two lay delegates. Eaton, who said they wanted to protest "in as godly and Christian a manner as possible," told the convention that he had never resigned from the Standing Committee and thus should not have his seat taken away from him.

Tulare delegate George Sutton objected to what he called the "illegality" of the special convention, claiming that only the Standing Committee can call a special convention. Gillian Busch, the other lay delegate, said that the Tulare parish had not been included in the organization of the steering committee that worked toward the convention.

The Rev. Mark Hall, convention chair, replied that "this matter has been settled."

Jefferts Schori had told the participants earlier that the convention had been called because Bishop John-David Schofield had been deposed or removed from his diocesan seat after having abandoned the communion of the Episcopal Church, and because the Standing Committee removed because it took actions "which violated their ability to hold office in this church."

Congratulations to the members of the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin! Well done, good and faithful servants!

J.

UPDATE: You can listen to the news conference that followed the Convention here.

Bishop Katharine to San Joaquin: "You Are Not Alone"

From Episcopal Life:

...The work ahead of this diocese in the coming months is going to be about identity, reconciliation, and mission. As you seek a renewed life together in Christ, you are going to be invited to remember who and whose you are, why you're here, and what you're going to do about it. A useful shorthand might be: identity, vocation, and mission as members of the body of Christ. I have just a few reminders as you seek answers to those questions:

1) Jesus is Lord. In the same sense that Jesus is Lord, and not Caesar, remember that no one else -- not any hierarch, not any ecclesiastical official, not any one of you, is Lord. We belong to God, whom we know in Jesus, and there is no other place we find the ground of our identity

2) We are all made in the image of God. Even when we can't see that image of God immediately, we are challenged to keep searching for it, especially in those who may call us enemy. There is pain and hurt here to be reconciled, and searching for the image of God in those we have offended and who have offended us is a central part of our reconciling vocation.

3) In baptism we discover that we are meant to be for others, in the same way that God is for us. Jesus the best evidence of that. And that means that God's mission must be the primary focus, not our own hurt or indeed anything that focuses on our own selves to the exclusion of neighbor. For when we miss the neighbor, we miss God. I believe you are already discovering that God is healing old wounds as you work together. The work is just beginning, and it may not be easy, but it is essential. Focusing on the other, the ones outside this body, is going to be a vital part of discovering resurrection. Archbishop William Temple famously said that this church is the only human institution that exists primarily for the good of those outside of it. There is plenty of need here in this part of California -- among migrant workers, single parents, young people with little sense of future or direction, returning veterans… Put your eyes upon Jesus in the form of those strangers, and you will find resurrection.

And, finally, remember that you are not alone. This part of the Body of Christ is only one limb. The rest of the Episcopal Church is with you, and will continue to be with you. A few people have joined you here today as incarnate evidence of the love of Christ, known in community. We stand with you in the firm and constant hope that this body will grow and flourish and bless the central valley of California in ways you have not yet dreamed of. And we will celebrate with you as that becomes reality.

Alleluia, Christ is risen. The Lord is risen indeed. Alleluia.

J.

Healing Begins in Stockton

From Aghaveagh:

...People just kept on passing the peace for about 5 minutes or so when Father Mark Hall called us back to order. He formally introduced Katharine Jefferts Schori, Bishop Lamb and their spouses, and Bonnie Anderson He made a special presentation of a gift basket of St. Anne’s beers to the PB (“PB Stout”) and to Bonnie Anderson (“Anti-Schism Ale”), quipping that “this church is just a front for a brewery.” He didn’t skip Bishop Lamb however, noting that he will soon get a “key to the sacristy where all the beer is stored.”

Then the Q and A started. The questions were all in the same vein for the most part: what might happen next, what should we do in divided parishes, how should we move forward… for clarification about the HOB vote on the deposition. The PB is a very eloquent speaker. She noted that the vast middle of the Anglican Communion is annoyed that so much time and effort is spend on issues of human sexuality when there are people dying of hunger and disease in our midst.

One person expressed our thanks to the PB, to Bonnie Anderson and to Bishop Lamp for their support. At one point we gave PB a standing ovation.
She later said, “It is you who deserve a standing ovation for your hard work.”

After the Q and A we milled around and talked. I enjoyed a glass of St. Anne’s Porter: a humble little beer, not overly complicated, but smooth and comfortable.

So the big questions whether any of the Standing Committee will show tomorrow. I’ll go out on a limb and say that I think Father Snell and Father Eaton will show up. And I hope they do. We will welcome them back in if they want to be welcomed back in.

In closing, it was an evening marked by optimism, hope, and love. A fitting beginning to the work that continues tomorrow, and a big step toward healing for this battered diocese.

From Beryl:

I have just returned to my home this evening after a wonderful reception, and then a beautiful Evening Prayer and Healing Service. The church was filled to capacity, and it seemed to me that everyone present went forward for anointing, and to move forward in a spirit of forgiveness and reconciliation. It was a moving and spiritual occasion. Afterwards, when Presiding Bishop Schori was introduced formally to the group, she received a standing ovation. Presiding Bishop Schori has such a calm and spiritual presence, and we all appreciate her willingness to come and be with us at this time. Bonnie Anderson was also present and participated in the Healing Service. It was a wonderful evening, and I can hardly wait for tomorrow...

...Thank you all for the prayers and support for us in the Diocese of San Joaquin. We truly feel that God's face is shining upon us. I feel so grateful to so many, to all those outside the diocese who have supported us, to those in our diocese who have been steadfast in the faith, to the priests here who have been faithful and strong, to the lay people here who have become empowered and energized by the circumstances.

From lost-sheep:

Tonight's service was beautiful. Everyone there was beautiful. It was such a pleasure to meet at least one more face from here at Jake's. I will miss tomorrow, but going tonight was very important to me. Among other things, I feel a bit spiritually renewed. There is more to come this weekend and I pray peace continues to fill our hearts, minds and souls in the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin. Kudos for Father Glenn Kanestrom and others who made tonight's service such an amazing, God-led and Spirit-filled event. Thank you to PB Schori for being here. Appreciation and gratitude to those praying for us.

From Episcopal Life:

...Jefferts Schori, Anderson and Bishop Jerry Lamb -- whom the Presiding Bishop has recommended to become San Joaquin's provisional bishop -- spent 45 minutes after the service answered questions from the congregation.

Asked how members of the diocese can go about the work of reconciliation, Lamb said there will need to be many more opportunities such as the March 28 gathering "to see each other on a very real face-to-face basis." He also said that he suspects there are many people in the diocese who are "feeling very much on the edge" and need to know that there will be safe and supportive places for them in the reorganized diocese.

One questioner asked about criticism of the way Jefferts Schori articulates her belief in Jesus Christ as savior.

"Do you believe Jesus died for the whole world?" she asked the questioner in reply.

"Yes, m'am," the woman replied.

"So do I," said Jefferts Schori. "If I can say with you that Jesus died for the whole world, then I think the mechanism [of salvation] is up to God."

God wants to be in relationship with all human beings, she said. "I am not too worried about how God does that," she added.

In response to a question about the status of church property in the diocese, Jefferts Schori said that one of the first tasks of the diocese's new leadership will be "to recover the corporate sole" of the diocese. This process will involve removing control of the property from deposed San Joaquin Bishop John-David Schofield.

"We believe since John-David Schofield has been deposed, he has no right to claim the property of the diocese as the corporate sole," she said.

The Presiding Bishop said that the Constitution and Canons of the Episcopal Church say that parish and diocesan property is held in trust for the entire church. "We believe those properties are a legacy" given by generations of Episcopalians for the use of generations yet to come, she said.

"We don't have the fiduciary or moral responsibility to simply walk away," Jefferts Schori told the audience. "They're meant for mission and we'll do what we can to recover them."

Answering a question about reports of problems with the March 12 consent by the House of Bishops to her request for authority to depose or remove Schofield from his diocesan position, Jefferts Schori said that the vote was conducted in the same way that other such deposition requests have been done.

While the applicable canon (Canon IV.9.2) may have "varieties of interpretation," the Presiding Bishop said that her chancellor and the House's parliamentarian ruled that the canon called for approval by the majority of those bishops present at the meeting. She added that the canon does not allow for a poll by mail of all bishops eligible to vote, as some have suggested ought to have been done.

"We believe that we did the right thing," she said, adding that the consent came from "a clear majority of those present."

When asked whether the House of Bishops will strengthen itself to deal with bishops who mistreat their dioceses, Jefferts Schori, reminding the audience of the Episcopal Church's governance structure, said such discipline is "not technically the responsibility of the House of Bishops."

The House can challenge the conduct of a member, she said, but "the ability to impose sanctions is quite limited, and when a bishop does not participate in the House of Bishops, it's even more difficult."

Schofield has not regularly attended House of Bishops meetings in recent years.

Jefferts Schori said that the fact that the Episcopal Church is made up of "relatively autonomous dioceses in relationship with each other through General Convention" means that discipline in part "depends on people being able to call each other to account," as opposed to having one person able to impose penalties.

The Presiding Bishop predicted that the next meeting of General Convention in July 2009 would be asked to consider ways to change the canons to better deal with such disciplinary matters. Anderson reminded the audience that General Convention deputies, such as those due to be elected by the San Joaquin diocese on March 29, can propose resolutions calling for such changes.

"If you have ideas about canonical changes, you have the authority through your deputies to bring them to General Convention," Anderson said.

Jefferts Schori and Anderson told the audience that the lessons which Episcopalians in San Joaquin have learned can be of help to their counterparts in other conflicted dioceses.

"There's a tremendous amount of wisdom that can be passed along to lay people and clergy in those other disaffected dioceses," Anderson said.

"And we firmly hope they are watching," Jefferts Schori added.

Today, the Convention of the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin begins. Please continue to keep this Convention in your prayers.

Almighty and Everliving God, source of all wisdom and understanding, be present with those who take counsel in the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin for the renewal and mission of your Church. Teach them in all things to seek first your honor and glory. Guide them to perceive what is right, and grant them both the courage to pursue it and the grace to accomplish it; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

J.

San Joaquin Diocesan Convention Begins: Prayers Requested

From Episcopal Life:

Members of the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin are gathering in Stockton, California, March 28 to take two major steps in reorganizing the diocese.

The first step will be a "service for healing and forgiveness" at the Episcopal Church of St. Anne in Stockton, the temporary home of the diocese. House of Deputies President Bonnie Anderson will preside at the service and Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori will lead the litany for healing. The Presiding Bishop and a number of other clergy will be available to anoint people during the service.

Prior to the service, St. Anne's will host a reception for Jefferts Schori and Anderson. After the service, the Presiding Bishop will engage members of the diocese in a question-and-answer session at the church.

The Rev. Mark Hall, St. Anne's rector and acting diocesan administrator, told ENS that interest in the healing service is keen. Based on registrations, he estimates about 350 people will attend -- a number that will stretch the seating capacity of St. Anne's.

"We have people we haven't heard from in years calling and saying they want to be part of it," he said.

Hall said that while there is a "lot of joy" in the diocese at the moment and some people may be feeling "somewhat vindicated," the healing service is important.

"This is not about being triumphant," he said. "This is about being the church and taking care of people...

...The second reorganizing step will come the following day, March 29, at the Episcopal Church of St. John the Baptist in Lodi when the diocese gathers for a special one-day convention.

“As the faithful people of the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin gather this weekend, it marks a sign of hope for the future," the Rev. Dr. Charles Robertson, canon to the Presiding Bishop, told ENS. "As specified in Canon III.13.1, the Presiding Bishop will be present to consult with the Convention about a provisional bishop.

"However, her presence and that of the President of the House of Deputies is also a reminder of the larger Church which stands with, prays for, and supports the people of the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin as they move forward in mission and ministry."

Canon III.13.1 states in part that "a Diocese without a Bishop may, by an act of its Convention, and in consultation with the Presiding Bishop, be placed under the provisional charge and authority of a Bishop of another Diocese or of a resigned Bishop"...

...The March 29 convention will welcome clergy who had not been allowed to serve in the diocese. Three new congregations: Grace, Bakersfield; Holy Trinity, Madera; and St. Mary's in-the-Mountains, Sonora; will be also welcomed. Delegates will also be asked to elect a standing committee and deputies to General Convention 2009 in Anaheim, California; and to approve a $445,243 budget, which is funded with money provided by the Episcopal Church's Executive Council from the wider church's budget.

Hall told ENS that 17 congregations will officially participate in the convention. Another estimated 20 congregations will have members present, he said. Such participation would represent a larger portion of the diocese than he and others anticipated would choose to remain in the Episcopal Church, Hall said...

Representatives from 37 congregations, out of a total of 47, will be present at this Convention. Thanks be to God!

I am hoping that some of the faithful Episcopalians from San Joaquin who visit here will keep us updated throughout the weekend.

Please keep this Convention in your prayers.

J.

Conger Reunites Coup Conspirators: Wantland, Howe and Schofield

First we have an opinion piece in the Living Church floating the idea that the votes to consent to the recent depositions at the last House of Bishops' meeting were inadequate. And now we have this announcement in the Church of England Newspaper:

...A subsequent investigation by CEN in conjunction with The Living Church magazine revealed an insufficient number of votes to convict were cast also...

The author of both articles is George Conger. It is safe to assume that this "investigation" is most likely nothing more than Conger's "opinions."

Conger, and if we follow his extension, the Church of England Newspaper, has gotten it wrong before. And, in my opinion (or should I call it my investigation?), Conger has gotten it wrong once again.

As Mark Harris points out, the errors begin with the title. There was no "trial." Thus, there was also no "conviction." The Bishops voted to give consent to the Presiding Bishop to depose those bishops who have abandoned the Church that ordained them, following the same process that has been used in every other deposition of a Bishop.

We've discussed the matter of the various interpretations of the relevant canon already. Some friends of Jake's place shared their concerns as to the way the House of Bishops has interpreted that canon. I tend to agree with the Bishops' interpretation. That is the way that canon has been understood in every other deposition. Conger's interpretation is the innovation. But, out of respect for those here who have voiced their concerns, I will agree that the canon in question needs to be cleaned up, hopefully at GC2009. Yet I still hold to my opinion that Conger's interpretation is simply wrong.

There's one more very strange matter in Conger's latest bit of "investigative reporting." Who does Conger quote as his "expert" regarding Canon Law? Retired Bishop William Wantland. Who does he quote from the House of Bishops? John Howe. And who is one of the deposed Bishops they are defending? John-David Schofield. Wantland, Howe and Schofield. Got that?

Ok, now let's go back twelve years to 1996 and Bishop Wantland's Attempted Coup d'Etat:

...According to documents obtained by the presiding bishop's office, a group of conservative bishops created a non-profit organization in 1996, using a variation on the corporate name of the Episcopal Church. Bishops William Wantland of Eau Claire (Wisconsin), John Howe of Central Florida, and John-David Schofield of San Joaquin (California) are identified in documents as founding directors of a new, non-profit corporation registered in at least 24 states as PECUSA, Inc.--The Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America, Incorporated.

The incorporation papers, first chartered in the state of Wisconsin in August 1996, stated that the corporation's purpose is "to engage in religious, educational and charitable activities and particularly the executive, administrative and financial administration of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America, otherwise known as the Episcopal Church. It shall have charge of the church pension fund and the church's program ..." (emphasis added)

Well, imagine that.

Bp. Howe backed off when confronted by the Presiding Bishop:

...In a statement sent to all clergy in Central Florida, Howe said he had "immediately resigned" when the presiding bishop "learned of the effort earlier this month."

Howe wrote that he had been approached by Wantland "about a year and a half ago." Wantland "suggested there might be a way of creating a structure within the church that would preserve its faithfulness to the scriptures, the Book of Common Prayer, and the faith we have received. It would not be a matter of creating a new organization, but simply incorporating who we are . . ."

"Bishop Wantland's thought was that if at some point the General Convention should take actions that were truly unacceptable, actions that represented a departure from `the faith once entrusted to the saints,' there would be a kind of safety zone within the church where orthodox believers could remain. . . . I agreed to be a part of that effort and to put my name on the board of trustees."

"A structure within the church." That sounds familiar. Sounds like these three Bishops hatched Plan A for an attempted coup. What we're now witnessing must be Plan B, C, D or E, depending on whose history of the ESA, FiF, AAC, Network, CCP etc. you follow.

The point being, I think the integrity of this "investigation" became even more deeply flawed with the introduction of Bp. Wantland's name into it. Some of us have longer memories than Conger may have assumed.

J.

The Times They Are A Changing

The sheriff (former SJ SC Pres) and the outlaw (eccentric heretic)

in better times (Nashotah House gym, 1989).

A "Heads Up" to San Joaquin

The Convention of the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin will meet this Saturday. They will begin with a Healing Service and Reception on Friday night (I presume it will be Friday night; note to EDSJ webmaster-a date would be helpful on that page). The agenda, report of the nominating committee and resolutions can be found here.

There's a couple of matters that I would hope faithful Episcopalians in San Joaquin will keep in mind during what should be a joyous and historic moment in the life of this Diocese.

First, anticipate some gate crashers. From the tone of the latest missive of the "Standing Committee Who May or May Not Be Episcopal, But We're Not Telling", it appears that they intend to keep up the charade that they are the REAL Standing Committee, and that John-David Schofield is the REAL Bishop of San Joaquin. Both claims are erroneous, yet I think it is still safe to assume that some of these men are going to show up on Saturday and try to disrupt things.

Why do I think that? First of all, because of their evident arrogance in their response to our Presiding Bishop's announcement that she could not recognize them as members of the Standing Committee of San Joaquin. For more on that,I refer you to a previous post; SC Shoots Themselves in the Other Foot. The bottom line is that all they had to do was declare their desire to remain as Episcopalians. Instead, they wrote an angry letter voicing various accusations against our Presiding Bishop. We're still waiting for these men to let us know if they are Episcopalians or members of the Southern Cone. Their refusal to answer that simple question suggests that our Presiding Bishop made a good call in deciding not to recognize them. Obviously, they have abandoned the Episcopal Church. Time to elect a new Standing Committee.

There's another reason to be prepared for these gate crashers. A prominent member of this former Standing Committee has a history of throwing temper tantrums. Numerous times he has been seen berating and shouting at members of his congregation, reducing them to tears. In every case, these members were women, of course. Keep in mind that this Diocese was first well known for its anti-women stance before it jumped on the anti-gay bandwagon. This man obviously has some serious personal problems, and has no business continuing to function as a priest, let alone a member of the Standing Committee, until they are resolved. If he had not been protected by John-David for all these years, he would have probably been removed a long time ago.

I am inclined to believe that this priest was the primary author of the angry letter sent to our Presiding Bishop. After all, she's just another uppity woman, right? The problem for them is, it takes more than a few petty bullies to reduce Katharine Jefferts Schori to tears.

So, anticipate some rude disruptions, most likely when a woman is speaking from the podium. Plan how you will deal with these angry men. These are not "nice" people, keep in mind, so pleas to be civil are most likely going to be ineffective. Local police, or security personnel, may have to remove them. Just my opinion. As someone who thinks "being nice" is not always the appropriate response, and can actually be detrimental to resolving some situations, I'm advocating for a rapid and strong response to such shenanigans. But do what you think is best.

The other matter I would think it would be prudent to keep in mind is that there may be an attempt to sidetrack the Convention into a debate on the validity of the vote to depose John-David. It is clear, from the good comments made by some folks here and elsewhere, that the Canon needs to be cleaned up. But, that does not invalidate the vote.

For background on that matter, I refer you to Mark Harris' latest thoughts; Beyond Schofield and Cox.

Something that Mark brings up is worth noting. There are at least two precedents for the way the recent vote was carried out. In 1993, at a meeting of the House of Bishops, consent was given to depose Donald Davies. 137 bishops were present to vote at that meeting. In 2004, the House of Bishops consented to the deposition of Neptali Larrea Moreno. Here is how that action is described:

The Rt. Rev. Neptali Larrea Moreno, Bishop of Ecuador Central, has been deposed from the ministry by a unanimous vote of the House of Bishops, meeting at Camp Allen, Texas, on March 23...

Now, unless you want to believe that by some miracle every single bishop of TEC was present for that meeting, it is clear that the unanimous vote was of those bishops present for the meeting.

Yes, the wording of that canon needs to be cleaned up, and most likely will be in 2009. But right now, the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin needs to move on. John-David Schofield is deposed. On Saturday, Jerry Lamb will become the new provisional Bishop of San Joaquin.

So, don't let that discussion distract you from the important business you have to carry out on Saturday. And beware of the gate crashers.

Pray for the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin.

Pray for the Church.

J.

To All The Knee-Jerkers: Take a Pill and Read the Canons

Today some are in a frenzy, having smelled blood in the water regarding what they desperately want to believe are "canonical irregularities" at the last House of Bishop's meeting. One half of the team that put them onto this scent of blood was none other than George Conger, who we have previously pointed out sometimes gets his numbers wrong. That anyone would take a report from him as gospel at first reading is rather surprising. Here's part of that report:

Slightly more than one-third of all bishops eligible voted to depose bishops John-David Schofield and William J. Cox during the House of Bishops’ spring retreat, far fewer than the 51 percent required by the canons.

The exact number is impossible to know, because both resolutions were approved by voice vote. Only 131 bishops registered for the meeting March 7-12 at Camp Allen, and at least 15 of them left before the business session began on Wednesday. There were 294 members of the House of Bishops entitled to vote on March 12...

Now, sit down, take a deep breath, and let's see if I can explain the situation to you. No, I'm not a lawyer, and have never been a student of the canons, but I can read. Beyond that, dr. primrose was kind enough to point me in the right direction in the comments, so I feel fairly confident that I'm capable enough to help us work through this stuff.

It's about the Constitution and Canons, right? Then the first thing you need to do is go read them for yourself. You can find them here. We need to begin by considering if there were even enough Bishops present at their last meeting to conduct any business. Let's start by sorting out what makes a "quorum" of the House of Bishops.

From Article 1, Section 2 of the Constitution:

Sec. 2. Each Bishop of this Church having jurisdiction, every Bishop Coadjutor, every Suffragan Bishop, every Assistant Bishop, and every Bishop who by reason of advanced age or bodily infirmity, or who, under an election to an office created by the General Convention, or for reasons of mission strategy determined by action of the General Convention or the House of Bishops, has resigned a jurisdiction, shall have a seat and a vote in the House of Bishops. A majority of all Bishops entitled to vote, exclusive of Bishops who have resigned their jurisdiction or positions, shall be necessary to constitute a quorum for the transaction of business.

Now, unless there is some kind of legal jargon hidden in this that I'm missing, it appears that "resigned" (which would include "retired") Bishops have voice and vote, but do not have to be present to make up a quorum. Note also that "Assistant" Bishops are included, but "Assisting" Bishops are not.

If we look at Louie Crew's (L1 Newark 09) amazing compilation of information, by my count there are 132 Bishops who have not "resigned their jurisdiction." My count could be off by a few. See what number you come up with. That means that 67 active bishops would have been needed at the latest House of Bishop's meeting for a quorum to be present. Since over 130 were present, (possibly more or less...I'm using George's numbers, keep in mind) it's more than likely that they had a quorum.

Next is the question as to if there was a majority vote to depose John-David Schofield. For this part of our discussion, a tip of the saturno to dr. primrose for pointing out what should have been obvious to all of us, including the authors of the LC article.

First, we have to define some of the terms used in the Canons. In Title IV, Canon 15, we find this definition:

All the Members shall mean the total number of members of the body provided for by Constitution or Canon without regard to absences, excused members, abstentions or vacancies.

This seems to be the defintion the authors of the LC are suggesting, although that phrase it not used in regards to the House of Bishops. In Title IV, Canon 9, Section 1 "Of Abandonment of the Communion of This Church by a Bishop," we do indeed find this terminology used, in reference to the Review Committee:

...it shall be the duty of the Review Committee, by a majority vote of All the Members, to certify the fact to the Presiding Bishop...

Yet, in the very next section, when speaking of the vote by the House of Bishops to depose, the phrase "All the Members" is not used. Here is the wording:

...Otherwise, it shall be the duty of the Presiding Bishop to present the matter to the House of Bishops at the next regular or special meeting of the House. If the House, by a majority of the whole number of Bishops entitled to vote, shall give its consent, the Presiding Bishop shall depose the Bishop from the Ministry...

Follow the process in that section. The Presiding Bishop presents that matter to the Bishops at a meeting. If the Bishops entitled to vote give consent, the Bishop is deposed. The wording suggests that it is a majority of Bishops at that meeting entitled to vote that is required. Otherwise, the terminology "All the Members" would have been included, as it was in the previous section.

The wording of that canon certainly needs to be cleaned up. That is quite clear. But, what is also clear is that the vote was indeed valid, meaning that John-David Schofield is no longer a Bishop in the Episcopal Church.

Now, can we please begin talking about something else?

J.

UPDATE: From Episcopal Life:

The Presiding Bishop's chancellor has confirmed the validity of votes taken in the House of Bishops on March 12, correcting an erroneous report published online March 14 by The Living Church News Service.

Chancellor David Booth Beers said votes consenting to the deposition of bishops John-David Schofield and William Cox conformed to the canons.

"In consultation with the House of Bishops' parliamentarian prior to the vote," Beers said, "we both agreed that the canon meant a majority of all those present and entitled to vote, because it is clear from the canon that the vote had to be taken at a meeting, unlike the situation where you poll the whole House of Bishops by mail. Therefore, it is our position that the vote was in order."

A quorum had been determined at the meeting by the House of Bishops' secretary, Kenneth Price, Bishop Suffragan of the Diocese of Southern Ohio.

"...the canon meant a majority of all those present..." All those present, or "the whole number of Bishops entitled to vote" who were present, to clarify that both active and retired Bishops were to vote, without any qualifications, such as those included in the calling of a quorum.

The Lying Ex-Bishop

John-David Schofield has responded to his recent deposition. Here is part of that response:

...“The question that begs to be answered by the House of Bishops,” said Bishop Schofield, “is, why bishops who continue to teach and publish books that deny the most basic Christian beliefs are not disciplined while those of us who uphold the Christian Faith are?”...

...“I have not abandoned the Faith,” Schofield observed. “I resigned from the American House of Bishops and have been received into the House of Bishops of the Southern Cone. Both Houses are members of the Anglican Communion. They are not – or should not be – two separate Churches. It is the leadership of The Episcopal Church that is treating itself as a separate and unique Church"...

In response to this statement from John-David Schofield, I am offering an essay by Bryan Taylor-Ferguson, AOJN, who is an Episcopalian from the Diocese of Fort Worth. Bryan's thoughts are published here with his permission.
______________________________

Lying ex-bishop.

He wasn't deposed for abandoning the Faith. He was deposed for abandoning and otherwise violating the discipline of the Episcopal Church. While the people ask for the candidate to be consecrated "a bishop in the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church," it is the Episcopal Church to whom each ordained bishop is accountable for the oath of conformity. Meaning no irony here, but the Anglican Communion has no "discipline" of its own. Bishops are generally recognized anywhere they may go, but they remain accountable to the Church that made them a bishop and where they serve. And there is no appeal beyond that Church if they run amuck and suffer the consequences. Those are the facts.

NEITHER the House of Bishops of TEC nor the House of Bishops of the Southern Cone "belong" to the Anglican Communion. Their churches do.

And yes, they ARE two churches, not one. The Anglican Communion is not a church (much less "The" Church). It is a federation of freely allied but independent and autonomous churches. That's still all it is, regardless of who says or thinks or wishes otherwise.

Within that communion, there have always been boundaries, and the Southern Cone has violated them by intervening in the affairs of the Episcopal Church. This they did when they began "receiving" bishops, priests, and congregations from TEC and claiming them as their own.

They did that in spite of directives condemning all such jurisdictional intrusions, from the very authorities they claim supercede the autonomy of The Episcopal Church. Those would be the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Windsor Report, the Primates' Meeting, and others besides. So those authorities, the so-called Instruments of Unity (or Communion), are to be obeyed, apparently, only when it suits them.

(Now there's an irony. That is precisely how the independent, autonomous provinces respond to those same authorities: as it suits them. That's what "autonomous" means. But while the provinces making up the Anglican Communion are autonomous churches, bishops are NOT autonomous.)

Mr. Schofield was made a bishop of the Episcopal Church BY the Episcopal Church. His status as a bishop, his oath of conformity, and his claim to membership in the Anglican Communion are all contingent upon his conduct in the Episcopal Church and no other.

None of which has any connection to the diocese he was formerly bishop of. It didn't become his upon his consecration. No bishop gets a right to preserve the diocese as it suits him, or to control what kind of bishops may succeed him or her in office. Nor is there any exception to their oath of conformity It doesn't have the legal capacity to remove itself from The Episcopal Church. Moreover, the Province of the Southern Cone restricts new dioceses to the geographical territory of the Province, which is made up of the nations of Argentina, Chile, and others at the southern tip of South America. That's right: the Southern Cone House of Bishops violated their own church's constitution in "receiving" San Joaquin. Schofield's assertion that he has just moved from one house to another within the larger Anglican Communion is built on these very shaky assumptions and claims.

As for his question, "why bishops who continue to teach and publish books that deny the most basic Christian beliefs are not disciplined while those of us who uphold the Christian Faith are?” the answer is not all that complicated.

He is not being disciplined for upholding the Christian Faith. He is being disciplined for schismatic activities culminating in this bogus attempt at diocesan secession. Indeed, it is precisely the same tolerance for diversity of belief that has allowed Schofield, Iker, and others to retain their status as bishops and allowed them wide latitude within their dioceses all these many years. If we were to think in terms of national life, their behavior would be termed fraud at least and probably sedition, consipiracy to commit treason, and treason. Schofield enjoyed exactly the same tolerance as Spong, and for exactly the same reason, until he crossed over from conspiracy to actual schism.

Bishops don't "solemnly engage to conform to the doctrine, discipline, and worship of the Episcopal Church" until it changes in a way they don't like. I see no exceptions there on page 513 of the Book of Common Prayer, and no license anywhere to begin doing anything a bishop may think is justified when finding himself with such profound animosity toward the majority of that same church.

"We must serve God rather than men." All-righty then. Go in peace to love and serve the Lord. But you won't be a bishop of this church any more, and you go as an individual, not as a bishop and not with your former diocese. The diocesan office, the car, the retreat center, any diocesan property whatsoever stays because it isn't yours and never was. Telling people otherwise is fraud. Any action that makes that property unavailable for use by Episcopalians is theft. Much whining about litigation being so un-Christian, but how about the Ten Commandments? Litigation wouldn't be necessary without the innovations cooked up by this years-long conspiracy to overthrow the constitutional and canonical processes (and results) of our church governance, the very "discipline" to which all bishops "solemnly engage to conform." It was not the Episcopal Church who invented bizarre legal theories and ridiculous pseudo-precedents to persuade people that they could do what canon and civil law pretty clearly says they cannot, and secede from the Church without any property consequences. It was the rejectionists who invented the concept of "primatial oversight" in order to keep from getting girl cooties from the Most Rev'd Katharine Jefferts Schori. It was Schofield, Iker and company who have stayed away from House of Bishops meetings as often as not, and kept the people of their dioceses from participating in any activities with other dioceses, or with the national church, who have made dialog and compromise impossible by refusing to even come to the table.

This isn't historic Anglicanism. It isn't the Episcopal Church of their beloved but distorted memories. It's a religion based on a purity code, where contamination--by women, by homosexuals, by people whose beliefs may not exactly mirror theirs--determines where they will go and what they will do. That's a new religion within Anglicanism as surely as the bogey-man "revisionism" they carry on about, and which barely resembles the Episcopal Church most of us actually know and support.

Mr. Schofield is no longer a bishop as far as Episcopalians are concerned, and I'm calling him a liar on all the above counts.

Bryan Taylor-Ferguson, AOJN
______________________________

Strong words. However, I fail to see any inaccuracies in them.

We've used lots of strong words regarding the situation in San Joaquin over the last few months. And no doubt Bryan's essay will generate even more strong words. That's ok. Sometimes we need a safe place to speak our truth, even if our words cause more gentle folk to feel uncomfortable.

So say it. Get it all out of your system. Because we're going to be moving on, starting tomorrow.

To the small degree that we were able, we have contributed to the outcome in San Joaquin that we have witnessed over the last few days. If that contribution was primarily positive or negative is certainly debatable. But what I hope we can all agree on is that it is now time to let all that go, and allow those in the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin to begin the work of rebuilding in the light of a new day, without the clouds of yesterday obscuring their vision.

So if you have something to say about the recent events in San Joaquin, this may be your last chance, at least for the next week, to give them voice. I have some very different types of conversations in mind for Holy Week, and I'd prefer to not have this matter still lingering about.

J.

New Website for the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin

Go take a look.

Note the inclusion of the agenda for the Special Convention to be held in Lodi on March 29. Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori will convene the Convention, and will then appoint the Rev. Mark Hall as Chair.

House of Deputies President Bonnie Anderson will also be present.

The Diocesan Constitution as amended to 2001, and the Canons as amended in 2003, will be presented by resolution to be adopted as valid.

The nomination of The Right Reverend Jerry A. Lamb as Provisional Bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin will be confirmed.

Elections for Standing Committee and Delegates to General Convention 2009 will be held.

The Convention will conclude with a celebration of the Holy Eucharist and the seating of the Provisional Bishop.

It's going to be a great day. Members of San Joaquin won't want to miss it.

Convention participation requirements can be found here.

J.

A Heads Up to the Media Reporting on San Joaquin

epiScope offers us a number of press reports regarding the deposed Bishop of San Joaquin. The links are prefaced by a timely clarification that should be mandatory reading for any reporter who values their credibility:

Let’s just get some housekeeping out of the way first.

1. We’re Episcopalians, not “Episcopals.” (Just like those folks down the street are Methodists, not Methods.)
2. The ecclesiastical body known as the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin hasn’t left the Episcopal Church just because some of its members have.
3. +Gene Robinson isn’t the first gay bishop, or the first openly gay bishop, in the Episcopal Church, the Anglican Communion, or Christendom. He’s the first openly gay man to be consecrated bishop. (That we know of. 1,980 years--plus or minus a few--is a long, long time to go without the Internet.)
4. Deposed clergy are not "stripped." They may retain their frocks, along with other contents of their closets. It's the title and the property they can't keep.

Let's strive to not perpetuate these common errors in our comments here at Jake's place.

J.

San Joaquin is Moving Forward With Plans to Rebuild the Diocese

For the third time today - from Episcopal Life:

..."I am very pleased that the House of Bishops has acted with integrity, following the Constitution and Canons of The Episcopal Church (TEC)," said the Rev. Mark Hall, rector of St. Anne's Church in Stockton, where a new diocesan headquarters has been established. "We recognize that we've had some people not following the Constitution and Canons and that's not been helpful for the diocese and the church," he added.

For Nancy Key, co-founder of Remain Episcopal, an organization of continuing Episcopalians, the news, though expected, brought both relief and sadness.

"Now we can get back to the business of being church, we can move forward in rebuilding our diocese," said Key, a member of the steering committee appointed by Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori to help organize the March 29 convention to elect a provisional bishop.

"I have mixed feelings," she added. "It was a responsible decision to be made. It had to be made. The entire situation which precipitated it over many years is very, very sad. Now, we have a lot of healing to be done, a lot of pieces to be picked up."

The Presiding Bishop, during a telephone press conference after the conclusion of the March 7-12 Camp Allen meeting in Navasota, Texas, said she will personally convene the special convention in San Joaquin. She declined to identify a nominee for provisional bishop.

"As of today he is no longer a bishop in the Episcopal Church," she said of Schofield. "Matters down the road will include clarifying the status of Corp Sole, which is how property is held in that diocese"...

...Hall said preparations are rapidly underway for the March 29 special convention, including accommodations for 500 and a couple of pre-convention get-acquainted meetings with Bishop Jerry Lamb of Northern California, the provisional bishop nominee. He will meet with continuing Episcopalians at 6.30 p.m. Thursday, March 13 at Christ the King Church in Riverbank, and at 6.30 p.m. on Friday, March 14, at Holy Family Church in Fresno.

He said 17, possibly more, churches are expected to participate at the convention, including three new congregations. All attendees will be asked to sign a letter of conformity acknowledging the authority of General Convention, the Presiding Bishop and the Constitution and Canons of TEC.

"We invited everyone to the convention. Everybody got notified, we have not tried to eliminate anybody by our process," added Hall...

Lots of good news from Episcopal Life. If I were in San Joaquin, I'd make a point of turning up either tomorrow or Friday to meet with Bp. Lamb.

The Presiding Bishop will convene the Convention in Lodi on the 29th. Excellent. Also, note that she is fully aware and working on that "corporate sole" matter, by which Mr. Schofield claims ownership of all the property through papers filed with the state of California. Sorting that out will open the way to getting the church buildings back.

A letter of conformity will be required for those who participate in the Convention. As a rule, I don't like such letters, but understand why one is necessary in this situation. I see no other way to keep the schismatics from crashing the party.

The Lead has links to stories by the secular press about San Joaquin. Most are inaccurate, especially in their statements regarding the Diocese voting to leave for the Southern Cone, and then continuing as if such a Diocese exists. As we have discussed, the creation of such a Diocese is impossible, according to the Southern Cone's Constitution and Canons, regardless of what Presiding Bishop Venables or anyone else claims.

The new Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin website is brimming with useful information for the members of San Joaquin. Make sure you check that site regularly.

There's still a lot of work to be done, but it's starting to feel a lot like Easter already, isn't it?

Pray for the Diocese of San Joaquin.

Pray for the Church.

J.

Presiding Bishop Recommends Bishop Lamb for San Joaquin

Bp. Katharine is wasting no time. This afternoon, we hear this from Episcopal Life:

Bishop Jerry A. Lamb -- retired bishop of Northern California and most recently interim bishop of Nevada -- has been recommended by Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori to serve as provisional bishop of the Central California Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin.
Lamb can begin work in this capacity after ratification by the diocese's convention, set to meet March 29 in Lodi, California.

The convention follows the House of Bishops' March 12 vote consenting to the deposition of San Joaquin's previous bishop, John-David Schofield, who is confirmed by the church-wide Title IV Review Committee to have abandoned communion of The Episcopal Church.

Continuing Episcopalians have been at work to reconstitute the Diocese of San Joaquin since Schofield led a December 8 convention vote purporting to realign the diocese with the Argentina-based Anglican Province of the Southern Cone.

Lamb is prepared to visit the San Joaquin diocese in mid-March, and to attend the March 29 convention.

Looking ahead to the possibility of his service in San Joaquin, Lamb told ENS that he sees his role as bringing "support for the leadership already there, offering direction, and helping to renew those in the area who remain part of the Episcopal Church.

"I'm really excited and very much humbled by the opportunity of being with that group of folks who are seeking a way to remain faithful to the Episcopal Church, and working to continue the life of the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin."

Lamb said this work represents "a wonderful opportunity to rebuild, though I am so sorry it's come about in the way it has."

Lamb said he looks forward to working closely with the steering committee appointed for the diocese by the Presiding Bishop, and with local groups including Remain Episcopal and new faith communities.

He said he would continue to build on the work of the Rev. Canon Robert Moore and the Rev. Canon Brian Cox, two priests whom the Presiding Bishop named earlier this year to provide pastoral presence in the diocese.

Rebuilding "would not be possible without the absolute support of the Presiding Bishop; the President of the House of Deputies, Bonnie Anderson; and the Executive Council putting $500,000 into this effort," Lamb said, citing the Council's February 14 vote to allocate funds.

Lamb also praised the "generous contributions of expertise from across the church" and especially within neighboring and other dioceses in the Episcopal Church's Province VIII. " Bishops and leaders from surrounding dioceses and the whole of Province VIII have been extremely supportive and have offered aid and support to whatever extent they are able," he said.

"This extended family we call The Episcopal Church wants to continue to support the local initiatives of the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin both through our prayers and other tangible forms of assistance," said the Rev. Dr. Charles Robertson, canon to the Presiding Bishop...

You may recall that Bp. Lamb was one of the neighboring Bishops who attempted to get John-David Schofield deposed back in 2006. Imagine how much grief the people of San Joaquin would have been spared if they had been successful.

This 2003 article, which focuses on the fallout in the Diocese of Northern California following Bp. Lamb's consent to the election of Bp. Robinson, gives us some good insights into who Bp. Lamb is:

...Soft-spoken and friendly, Lamb has the manner of a kindly grandfather. A former Roman Catholic priest, Lamb left the church and married. During this time, he worked as a parole officer. But he once again felt the call to ministry, became an Episcopal priest and served in Oregon before coming to Sacramento. He and his wife, Jane, a former nurse, have one daughter. The family lives in south Sacramento.

The Rev. Marvin Bowers, rector of St. Paul's Episcopal Church in Healdsburg, remembers what impressed him about Lamb when he first met him. He says there were four final candidates for the position of bishop. Each was asked how he would balance his roles as the spiritual counselor and disciplinarian to the clergy. Bowers said the first three said they would be good leaders and pastors. Lamb gave a different answer.

"He said as a parole officer he had heard it all … and if he ever caught a priest lying to him, he'd nail his hind to the wall," says Bowers. "He got my vote after that -- he's honest and not afraid of holding people accountable"...

Sounds like a good choice, San Joaquin.

J.

Schofield is Out

From Episcopal Life:

RESOLVED, that pursuant to Canon IV.9.2 of the Episcopal Church, the House of Bishops hereby consents to the Deposition from the ordained ministry of the Rt. Rev. John-David Schofield, Bishop of the Diocese of San Joaquin.

EXPLANATION: On January 9, 2008, the Title IV Review Committee certified to the Presiding Bishop, pursuant to Canon IV.9.1, that the Rt. Rev. John-David Schofield, Bishop of the Diocese of San Joaquin, has repudiated the Doctrine, Discipline, and Worship of the Episcopal Church and has abandoned the Communion of the Church by, inter alia, departing from the Episcopal Church and purporting to take his Diocese with him into affiliation with the Province of the Southern Cone. In the intervening two months since the Presiding Bishop gave notice to Bishop Schofield of the foregoing certification, Bishop Schofield has failed to submit to the Presiding Bishop sufficient retraction or denial of the actions found by the Title IV Review Committee. Accordingly, the Presiding Bishop has presented the matter to the House of Bishops and requested consent to Bishop Schofield's Deposition.

This means that John-David Schofield will no longer be able to function as a Bishop in the Episcopal Church. Some will claim that he remains a Bishop. I would not make such a claim. Call me a Protestant, but the only "indelible mark" that I recognize is the one received at Baptism. But, the fact remains, regardless of your understanding of the sacramental rites of Holy Orders, that Mr. Schofield can no longer make any claim to being the Bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin. Now that Diocese can get on with appointing a provisional Bishop, and eventually electing a new Diocesan Bishop.

As we have previously discussed, the Constitution and Canons of the Southern Cone do not allow for the creation of a new Diocese in North America. Consequently, the Southern Cone Diocese of San Joaquin does not exist. Even if we grant the "catholic" notion that Mr. Schofield is still a Bishop, as of today he is a Bishop without a Diocese.

Regarding our "Guess the Date of Depositions" contest, the winner appears to me to be Paul (A.), who correctly identified the date of the first deposition to be March 12, 2008. However, frank also chose that date (along with March 10 and March 11..."vote early, vote often" is his chosen slogan), so if he wants a "Jake's Santos" t-shirt, I'd be happy to offer him one.

We've got some sharp folks around here, who obviously looked up the dates of the Spring HoB meeting. Bonnie chose March 13. Ann chose March 15. And David Charles Walker chose March 17, the day Patrick chased all the snakes out of Ireland. All good guesses, and deserving of a prize, it seems to me. Please send me your contact info.

We have been offered the following poem by a member of the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin to help us commemorate this historic day:

JD Schofield at Bat
(adapted from Casey at Bat)
The outlook wasn't brilliant for the Southern Cone that day;
The score stood one to zero, with but one last day to pray,
And then when Duncan got very quiet, and Iker did the same,
A pall-like silence fell upon the patrons of this game.

A straggling few came to their senses and left in deep despair. The rest
Clung to that hope which springs eternal in the human breast;
They thought, "If only JD could have his way,
We wouldn’t have to know these women or even someone gay.

Then from a hundred throats and more there rose a lusty yell;
It rumbled through the valley, it rattled in the dell;
It pounded on the mountain and recoiled upon the mouth,
For JD, mighty JD, was advancing to the south.

First the vote was taken, told this was their cross to bear;
JD commended those who took this risky dare.
Then came a second vote, jubilation across the land,
A strong and willful line had been drawn in the sand.

Many eyes were on him as he rubbed his hands with glee
One hundred tongues applauded when he cried Oh, me.
Then while the House of Bishops deposed him without a blip,
Defiance flashed in JD's eye, a sneer curled JD's lip.

Then the long-awaited letter came quickly through the air,
And JD stood at the ready in haughty grandeur there.
All watched close by as the letter unheeded sped —
"That ain't my style," said JD. "Strike one!" Katharine said.

From the pews, there went up a muffled roar,
Like the beating of the storm-waves on a stern and distant shore;
"Kill her! Kill the Presiding Bishop!" shouted some one on the stand;
And it's likely they'd have killed her had not JD raised his hand.

With a smile of a possessed man, great JD's visage shone;
He stilled the rising tumult; he bade the game go on;
He signaled to his minions, and once more the untruths flew;
But JD still ignored her, and Katharine said "Strike two!"

"Fraud!" cried the maddened followers, and echo answered "Fraud!"
But one scornful look from JD and his followers were awed.
They saw his face grow stern and cold, they saw his muscles strain,
And they knew that JD wouldn't let this day go by again.

The sneer has fled from JD's lip, his teeth are clenched in hate;
He pounds with cruel violence his staff upon the gate.
Now the bishops have decided, and thus they let him go,
And now the few are leaving by the force of JD's blow.

Oh, here in the valley the sun is shining bright,
The choir is singing loudly, and here our hearts are light,
Episcopalians are laughing, and little children shout;
But there is no joy in Fresno — mighty JD has struck out.

Lori Brown
Bakersfield, CA
March, 2008

J.

Will Bishop Schofield Be Deposed?

If we take a closer look at Bp. Schofield's resignation letter, it becomes more and more unclear what exactly it is supposed to accomplish. Here is the specific line under consideration:

...Rather than force the House of Bishops to a vote, I hearwith tender my resignation as a member of the House of Bishops of The Episcopal Church effective midnight EST, March 7, 2008...

Is that sufficient to avoid a vote by the House of Bishops regarding deposing this bishop? According to the Constitutions and Canons of the Episcopal Church, it appears to be an insufficient statement.

Regarding the resignation of a Bishop, we find this in the Constitution:

Article II, Sec. 6. A Bishop may not resign jurisdiction without the consent of the House of Bishops.

The House of Bishops has not given their consent to this resignation, nor are they likely to do so, in light of Bp. Schofield's assertion in the letter than he will remain as the Bishop of San Joaquin. He has no intention of resigning his jurisdiction. He is only resigning from the House of Bishops.

Bp. Schofield could have chosen another route to avoid a vote by the House of Bishops regarding his deposition. He could have renounced his orders:

Title III, Canon 12, Sec. 7. Renunciation of the Ordained Ministry (a) If any Bishop of this Church not subject to the provisions of Canon IV.8 shall declare, in writing, to the Presiding Bishop a renunciation of the ordained Ministry of this Church, and a desire to be removed therefrom, it shall be the duty of the Presiding Bishop to record the declaration and request so made...the Presiding Bishop may pronounce that such renunciation is accepted, and that the Bishop is released from the obligations of all Ministerial offices, and is deprived of the right to exercise the gifts and spiritual authority as a Minister of God's Word and Sacraments conferred in Ordinations.

But since Schofield seems determined to still claim to be a bishop, the above was clearly not the intention of his letter.

Was there anything Bp. Schofield might have done to dodge being deposed? Yes. The charges of abandoning this Church were affirmed by the Title IV Review Committee. With the consent of the three senior bishops, the Presiding Bishop inhibited him. He then had two months to refute or recant the charges against him:

Title IV, Canon 9, sec. 2. Unless the inhibited Bishop, within two months, makes declaration by a Verified written statement to the Presiding Bishop, that the facts alleged in the certificate are false or utilizes the provisions of Canon IV.8 or Canon III.12.7, as applicable, the Bishop will be liable to Deposition. If the Presiding Bishop is reasonably satisfied that the statement constitutes (i) a good faith retraction of the declarations or acts relied upon in the certification to the Presiding Bishop or (ii) a good faith denial that the Bishop made the declarations or committed the acts relied upon in the certificate, the Presiding Bishop, with the advice and consent of a majority of the three senior Bishops consenting to Inhibition, terminate the Inhibition. Otherwise, it shall be the duty of the Presiding Bishop to present the matter to the House of Bishops at the next regular or special meeting of the House.

In Bp. Schofield's "resignation" letter, he did not resign juridiction, he did not renounce his orders, and he did not deny or recant the facts alleged in the certification against him (actually, by declaring himself a member of the Southern Cone, he affirmed the facts). All he did was resign as a member of the House of Bishops.

Note the language of Title IV, Canon 9; "...Otherwise, it shall be the duty of the Presiding Bishop to present the matter to the House of Bishops at the next regular or special meeting of the House." It seems clear that the vote by the House of Bishops to depose Bishop Schofield must go forward.

J.

Bishop Schofield Resigns

The Lead points us to a letter from Bishop Schofield.

After the usual false accusations and hyperbole, the Bishop finally gets around to the reason for the letter:

...After the Diocese of San Joaquin had voted to become a member diocese of the Southern Cone, I was received into membership of the House of Bishops of the Southern Cone as the Bishop of San Joaquin. At this moment, therefore, I am a bishop in the House of Bishops of the Southern Cone, and I am the Bishop of the Diocese of San Joaquin. The Episcopal Church has no jurisdiction or authority to affect my status in any of these capacities. This leaves only my status as a member of the House of Bishops of The Episcopal Church to be determined. Rather than force the House of Bishops to a vote, I hearwith tender my resignation as a member of the House of Bishops of The Episcopal Church effective midnight EST, March 7, 2008...

A diocese does not have the authority to vote themselves out of this Church. Consequently, that vote in December changed nothing. There is only one Diocese of San Joaquin, and it is the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin. And, by this letter of resignation, John David Schofield is no longer the Bishop of that Diocese.

May there some day by a "Southern Cone Diocese of San Joaquin"? Perhaps. It would be a break with the tradition of not having overlapping dioceses. But we live in strange times. It could happen. But to date, it has not happened.

For such a new Diocese to be formed would require the amendment of the existing Constitution and Canons of the Province of the Southern Cone and a review by the Anglican Consultative Council, as we have previously discussed. Such amendments may be made some time in the future. But they haven't been made yet. Meaning that the "Southern Cone Diocese of San Joaquin" does not exist. It is nothing more than a figment of John David Schofield's imagination.

By this unusual resignation, Schofield may also believe he has escaped any disciplinary action for his schismatic actions. And perhaps he has. It is now no longer clear if the House of Bishops will proceed with his deposition.

I think it would be wise for them to proceed, regardless of this letter. Bp. Schofield has been back and forth so many times over the last few months; in TEC, out of TEC, then in if you want me to be, but out if I feel like it, etc., that it would be helpful if it is decided once and for all that this man is no longer a Bishop.

Usually, when clergy are deposed by TEC, that deposition is recognized throughout the Anglican Communion. Apparently, this tradition is being ignored in some places, such as the Southern Cone, who has a history of picking up deposed clergy. So, depose him, if for no other reason than, at least within boundaries of TEC, he will no longer be able to function as a Bishop of the Episcopal Church, the Southern Cone, the Diocese of San Joaquin, or any other designation that he might fancy in the future.

J.

Convention of the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin Scheduled for March 29

Lots of good news to be found in a recent article in Episcopal Life:

...A growing number of Episcopalians in the Diocese of San Joaquin are opting to remain within the Episcopal Church (TEC), as the Fresno-based diocese prepares for an anticipated March 29 special convention that would elect a provisional bishop.

Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori, in a letter to be distributed via a new diocesan newspaper, notes the proposed convention date and reassures the people of the diocese that work is ongoing "to ensure that you and your fellow Episcopalians may continue to bless the communities around you well into the future"...

...Moore noted as signs of progress the appointment of a 26-member steering committee to help continue the diocese (see roster below); 17 congregations who have opted to remain with TEC; the anticipated March 29 special convention to elect a provisional bishop; establishment of new diocesan headquarters in Stockton and a partnership with Episcopal Life Media to facilitate dissemination of information and to provide a new diocesan newspaper edition...

...In the absence of ecclesiastical authority, the Rev. Mark Hall, rector of St. Anne's Church in Stockton and the senior active priest in San Joaquin, is also serving as temporary diocesan administrator...

...Delegates to the anticipated March 29 convention will, in addition to electing a provisional bishop, also elect the standing committee, deputies to General Convention, provincial representatives and diocesan officers.

Michael Glass, a San Rafael attorney who represents many of the continuing Episcopalians, said Title III. Canon 13, Section 1 provides for the election of the provisional bishop "in consultation with the Presiding Bishop."

Glass predicted additional congregations will also "come out of the woodwork" and decide to remain with TEC after the election. "Right now the only authority is Bob Moore and Brian Cox and the steering committee," he said. "When people have a new bishop they can call up and an alternative functioning structure to interact with, you'll see more people."

TEC is providing the funding for ongoing mission congregations, and other forms of support have been designated by the Episcopal Church's Executive Council...

So, finally, we can see how things are going to unfold. A list of the members of the steering committee are included in the article.

Congratulations to the members of the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin. There's still much to be done, but your perseverence is now bearing fruit. I want to offer my heart felt thanks to our Presiding Bishop and the Executive Council, for their continued expressions of support for these faithful Episcopalians enduring a very difficult time.

I do want to point out one more curious comment from the EL article:

..."We talked to people this morning who simply hear rumors on blogs and get the impression that these various blogs and web pages are the national church speaking with some uniform voice...

Just for the record, this "blog" is the personal web log of an eccentric Episcopal priest who has no connection with the "national church," and whose voice is usually out of uniform. A black t-shirt and an old pair of jeans is my normal attire when at home. No reason to dress up if one is simply functioning as the voice of yet another backwater blog trafficking in rumors, right?

Congrats again to all our friends from San Joaquin. Easter is coming!

J.