Weekend Palate Cleanser; Thinking of My Wife Who Is Gone This Weekend In Florida For Her Dad’s Funeral

Okay. Odd title to the blog post. But, it is true. The weekend before last my wife was with her mother after surgery. Memorial Day weekend pretty much got ruined with news that Carrie’s Dad died. Funeral was today. Carrie and I both work and have three kids. So, weekends are pretty precious, even though we both do prison ministry weekends mostly to the detriment of each other. If you can, grab your spouse and dance to this one.

[Verse 1:]
There’s no combination of words
I could put on the back of a postcard,
No song that I could sing
But I can try for your heart,
Our dreams, and they are made out of real things,
Like a shoebox of photographs,
With sepiatone loving,
Love is the answer
At least for most of the questions in my heart ,
Like why are we here? And where do we go?
And how come it’s so hard?
It’s not always easy,
And sometimes life can be deceiving,
I’ll tell you one thing, its always better when we’re together

[Chorus:]
MMM, it’s always better when we’re together
Yeah, we’ll look at the stars when we’re together
Well, it’s always better when we’re together
Yeah, it’s always better when we’re together

[Verse 2:]
And all of these moments
Just might find their way into my dreams tonight
But I know that they’ll be gone,
When the morning light sings
And brings new things,
But tomorrow night you see
That they’ll be gone too,
Too many things I have to do,
But if all of these dreams might find their way
Into my day to day scene
I’ll be under the impression,
I was somewhere in-between
With only two,
Just me and you
Not so many things we got to do,
Or places we got to be
We’ll sit beneath the mango tree now

Yeah, it’s always better when we’re together
MMM, We’re somewhere in-between together
Well, it’s always better when we’re together
Yeah, it’s always better when we’re together

Mmmmm Mmmmm Mmmmm
I believe in memories
They look so, so pretty when I sleep
Hey now, and when, and when I wake up,
You look so pretty sleeping next to me
But there is not enough time,
And there is no, no song I could sing
And there is no combination of words I could say
But I will still tell you one thing,
We’re better together

The New Inside Strategy: Communion Partners

COMMUNION PARTNERS
In the context of discussions about the Episcopal Visitors concept announced by the Presiding Bishop at the House of Bishops meeting in New Orleans, we the undersigned have considered a need to maintain and strengthen

· our ties with the Anglican Communion
· our commitment to the observance of diocesan boundaries within The Episcopal Church
· and our exercise of our office as a focus of unity.
We believe such ties will provide the opportunity for mutual support, accountability and fellowship; and present an important sign of our connectedness in and vision for The Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion as we move through this time of stress and renewal.

PURPOSE:
Communion Partners is intended to

· provide for those concerned a visible link to the Anglican Communion
Many within our dioceses and in congregations in other dioceses seek to be assured of their connection to the Anglican Communion. Traditionally, this has been understood in terms of bishop-to-bishop relationships. Communion Partners fleshes out this connection in a significant and symbolic way.
· provide fellowship, support and a forum for mutual concerns between bishops.
The Communion Partner bishops share many concerns about the Anglican Communion and its future and look to work together with Primates and Bishops from the wider Communion. In addition, we believe we all have need of mutual encouragement, prayer, and reassurance. The Communion Partners will be a forum for these kinds of relationships.
· provide a partnership to work toward the Anglican Covenant and according to Windsor Principles
The Communion Partner bishops will work together according to the principles outlined in the Windsor Report and seek a comprehensive Anglican Covenant at the Lambeth Conference and beyond.

SCOPE:
Communion Partners
· is a relational fellowship
· are committed to honoring diocesan boundaries
· will be governed by mutual respect
· and will proceed by invitation and cooperation

PARTICIPANTS:

· Communion Partner Bishops (William H. Love, Albany; John W. Howe, Central Florida; James M. Stanton, Dallas; Russell E. Jacobus, Fond Du Lac; Michael G. Smith, North Dakota; Edward S. Little, Northern Indiana; Geralyn Wolf, Rhode Island; Mark J. Lawrence, South Carolina; John C. Bauerschmidt, Tennessee; Don A. Wimberly, Texas; Gary E. Lillibridge, West Texas; James M. Adams, Western Kansas; D. Bruce MacPherson, Western Louisiana)
· Communion Partner Primates (initially Tanzania, West Indies, and Burundi)
· Clergy and congregations who share Communion Partner commitments
· Other interested Bishops of The Episcopal Church

TRANSPARENCY:
Communication of activities with

· the Presiding Bishop of TEC,
· the Archbishop of Canterbury,
· the Meeting of Primates, and
· the Anglican Communion Office, and therewith the Anglican Consultative Council

This came directly from +Bruce MacPherson. A Living Church article is here.

Just A Few Thoughts On The Sauls Memorandum

The first thing I noticed is that this came from Saul’s property committee. Not the House committee on Constitution and Canons. This is extremely significant.

Secondly, the memorandum makes the specious argument that the word “whole” used in the abandonment of communion canon is there merely to have abstention votes count as no. The memorandum inserts “at the meeting” into the canon in the same vain without those words actually being there. The only substantive change in 1904 that was intended was to change the word “seat” to “vote” in the House of Bishops. The memorandum acknowledges this, and then proceeds to to take the fact that there would now be a meeting of the House to determine abandonment of communion charges rather than having this action taken by mail or by written action which adds procedural protections for the accused and turn this on its head by dramatically lowering the number of bishops required to consent to deposition for abandonment. It ignores the fact that the 1904 convention was in a process of canonical and constitutional revision, and the phrase was changed to match the Constitution. The phrase “bishops entitled to vote” is a term of art and must be interpreted consistently.

Then again, what else would one expect from a bishop who interprets scripture the way he does. The fact that he interprets law in the same manner comes as no surprise.

Obviously We’ve Got Them Worried Now: Bishop Stacy Saul’s Memorandum On the Illegal Depsoitions

MEMORANDUM
May 27, 2008
To: House of Bishops
From: Task Force on Property Disputes
Re: Proper Use of Abandonment Procedures for Bishops
Subsequent to our meeting at Camp Allen, some Bishops of The Episcopal
Church1 and some commentators2 have suggested that we may have failed to follow our
own rules for giving consent to the deposition of a Bishop for abandoning the
communion of this Church. A careful analysis and examination of the canon law,
however, confirms that consent to deposition was procedurally appropriate, as the
House’s Parliamentarian ruled and the Presiding Bishop’s Chancellor has advised.3
This memorandum is intended to provide the Members of the House with
necessary legal background and the reasoning supporting that conclusion for the
assurance of the Members as to past actions and in advance of their consideration of any
additional such actions in the future.
Conclusion
The House of Bishops followed the proper canonical procedure for consenting to
the depositions of John-David Schofield and William J. Cox from the Ministry of The
Episcopal Church as provided in Canon IV.9 of the Constitution and Canons of The
Episcopal Church (2006) for the following reasons:
A. The intended meaning of Section 2 of Canon IV.9 of the Constitution and Canons
of The Episcopal Church (2006) is that the consent of a majority of the Bishops
voting at a meeting of the House of Bishops constitutes valid consent for the
deposition of a Bishop.

Northern Indiana Also Protests The Depositions of Cox and Schofield

From here:

We, the Standing Committee of the Diocese of Northern Indiana strongly protest the failure of the Presiding Bishop, Katherine Jefferts Schori and Chancellor David Booth Beers to follow the Canons of our Episcopal Church in the depositions of Bishops John Schofield and William Cox. Deposition is the harshest punishment that can be handed a bishop. It is essential that both the letter and the spirit of the Canons be followed since, in this case, the rights of the accused are protected, in part, by the extraordinarily high level of involvement and concord called for within the House of Bishops by Canon IV.9.2. As others have pointed out, the Constitution and Canons of the Episcopal Church at various times distinguishes between a majority of the Bishops at a meeting, from a vote by a majority of the whole. Mr. Beers was incorrect in his assertion, reaffirmed by the Presiding Bishop in a letter to the House of Bishops (April 30, 2008), that the Canonical language of “the whole number of bishops entitled to vote” can be taken to mean only “those in attendance at a particular meeting.” This makes deposition an action with no higher standard than any matter of routine business. We agree with the analysis provided by the Bishops and Standing Committees of the Dioceses of South Carolina and Central Florida that the Canons plainly require a majority of all Bishops entitled to vote, not just those in attendance at a particular meeting. [1]

We call upon the Presiding Bishop and the House of Bishops to revisit those decisions and make every effort to follow our Church Canons in this and all future House of Bishops decisions.

We note with alarm that the Presiding Bishop has publically stated her intent to begin, at the September meeting of the House of Bishops, deposition proceedings against Bishop Robert Duncan of the Diocese of Pittsburgh for abandoning the communion before the diocese votes to do so in November. We plead for calm and prayer in the face of temptations to escalate abuses of power in this way. We agree with the Standing Committee of Central Florida and others who insist that depositions are an unnecessary and unfortunate way to deal with disagreement, dissension, and even division within our Church. We believe it also borders on unchristian.

This statement was written shortly after Trinity Sunday. The Trinitarian faith we profess in our worship is no mere exercise in divine arithmetic. The Trinity helps us know God’s true character within whose being exists a community of divine self-abasement. Thus understood, the Trinity is the foundation upon which truly human relationships are built. Everything the New Testament has to say about Christian relationships flows from this essential understanding of God the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Nowhere is this clearer than in Philippians 2:1-11.

We believe that when we let the same mind be in us that was in Jesus, other ways of responding to division come into view. Those Bishops (or other clergy) who, for sake of conscience, can no longer minister as part of The Episcopal Church can be transferred at their request, or permitted to renounce their vows and join with other Anglican Provinces without vindictiveness or punitive measures. Confrontation in the Church is an opportunity to show the world how Christians conduct themselves in the midst of serious disagreements. It is an opportunity to proclaim the Gospel.

We urge the House of Bishops to give attention to these matters in the name of mutuality, humility and concord.

We insist that when it becomes necessary to invoke the Canons, that both the letter and the spirit of the law be dutifully followed.

We encourage the Standing Committees of the various dioceses within The Episcopal Church to investigate these matters for themselves and prayerfully consider an appropriate response.

Peace be to the Church, and love with faith, from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ. Grace be with all who have an undying love our Lord Jesus Christ.

The Standing Committee of the Diocese of Northern Indiana :

The Rev. Bennett G. Jones II, President

The Rev. James Warnock, Secretary

The Rev. Canon Richard A. Kallenberg

Timothy C. Gray

Cynthia Guzzo
Pamela Barnes Harris

Memorial Day: Favorite War Movies

StandFirm has a thread that mentions some of the best movies ever made that are a good watch for this weekend. However, I thought of one that also tickles the funny bone.

South Carolina, Western Louisiana, Central Florida and now…

Whereas, by a vote taken on March 12, 2008, members of the House of Bishops of the Episcopal Church purported to take action deposing the Rt. Rev. John-David Schofield and the Rt. Rev. William J. Cox from the ministry of this Church, on the charge that, by affiliating with another Province of the Anglican Communion, they had “abandoned” the communion of this Church; and

Whereas, the process of deposition of a Bishop is an extraordinary one that must be approached in a prayerful manner with full cognizance of and respect for the procedural safeguards created to prevent the abuse of such a process; and

Whereas, the Canons mandate, as one safeguard, that such an action may only be taken by an extraordinary vote, that being “a majority of the whole number of Bishops entitled to vote” (Canon IV.9 (b)); and

Whereas, even if all Bishops registered at the March 2008 meeting had voted in favor of the depositions, that number would not have constituted “a majority of the whole number of Bishops entitled to vote”, as that number is defined in the first sentence of Article I.1.2 of the Constitution of the General Convention; and

Whereas, the members of the House gathered failed even to take a record of those voting in the affirmative on the issue of these depositions; and

Whereas, no reasoned explanation has been offered for the clearly non-canonical process that was followed; and

Whereas, prior failure to follow appropriate canonical procedure, as has been asserted, is not sufficient justification for these non-canonical actions; therefore

Be it resolved that the Standing Committee of the Diocese of Springfield joins the Dioceses of South Carolina and Western Louisiana in rejecting the purported depositions of Bishops Schofield and Cox; and further

Be it resolved that the Standing Committee of the Diocese of Springfield calls upon the Presiding Bishop, her staff and the House of Bishops to acknowledge publicly that the depositions of Bishops Schofield and Cox were not validly procured, and, should it be their desire to continue to seek depositions in these questionable circumstances, to revisit this issue at a future meeting of House of Bishops, conducting any further proceedings in accordance with the clear language of Canon.

Approved and adopted, May 22, 2008

Endorsed by The Rt. Rev Peter H. Beckwith, May 23, 2008

Endorsed by Diocesan Council, May 23, 2008

Poster for Friday

Central Florida Jumps On the Bandwagon…

Letter to the Presiding Bishop

From the Diocese of Central Florida

May 15, 2008

The Most Reverend Katharine Jefferts Schori

Presiding Bishop

The Episcopal Church Center

815 Second Avenue

New York, NY 10017

Dear Bishop Jefferts Schori,

Grace and peace from our God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.

We, the Diocesan Board and Standing Committee and Bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of Central Florida, strongly protest what we believe to have been a failure to follow the Canons of our Episcopal Church in the recent depositions of Bishops Schofield and Cox.

Since deposition is the most severe sanction that can be applied against a bishop, it is critical that both the letter and the spirit of the Canons be followed. The Canons intentionally provide for an exceptionally high level of participation and agreement from the Bishops in order to impose a sentence of deposition.  In this instance, it seems clear to us that the canonical safeguards in place were not followed.

We respectfully disagree with Mr. Beers assertion, which was reaffirmed by you in your April 30, 2008 letter to the House of Bishops, that the Canonical language of “the whole number of bishops entitled to vote” can be taken to mean only those in attendance at a particular meeting (Addendum 1).  Indeed, that would leave no higher standard for deposition than for any matter of routine business.  We agree with the analysis provided by Bishop and Standing Committee of the Diocese of South Carolina that the Canons plainly require a majority of all Bishops entitled to vote, not just those in attendance at a particular meeting.  (Addendum 2).

We respectfully request that you and the House of Bishops revisit those decisions and make every effort to follow our Church Canons in this and all future House of Bishops decisions.

Finally, we believe that depositions are an unnecessary and unfortunate way to deal with disagreement, dissension, and even division within our Church.  Those Bishops (or other clergy) who, for sake of conscience, can no longer minister as part of The Episcopal Church can be transferred at their request, or permitted to renounce their vows and join with other Anglican Provinces without vindictiveness or punitive measures.  This would avoid the horrible implication that it is “abandonment of Communion” to join with another Anglican Province with whom we are in Communion, even if impaired.  Further, it would be a gracious demonstration of the love of Christ to honor the service of these Bishops to our Church by wishing them Godspeed as they enter new phases of their life and ministry.

Our common desire is to conduct our common life in such a way as to build one another up in Christ and commend our Lord to all those who see us.  We pray that gracious and life-giving strategies will be found as we move through this difficult season.

Yours in Christ,

John W. Howe, Bishop

Anthony P. Clark, President of the Standing Committee

————————————————————————————————

ADDENDUM 1

House of Bishops’ votes valid, chancellor confirms

March 15, 2008

[Episcopal News Service] 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.

——————————————————————————————-

ADDENDUM 2

Under Canon IV.9.2, the House of Bishops must give its consent to depose a bishop under the “abandonment of communion” canon. “. . . by a majority of the whole number of Bishops entitled to vote.”  The Constitution of the Episcopal Church, Article I.2, states in pertinent part that “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 . . . has resigned a jurisdiction, shall have a seat and vote in the House of Bishops.”

Due to amendment, Canon IV.9.2, at various times, required consent under these circumstances consisting of “ . . . a majority of the House of Bishops,” “. .. . a majority of the whole number of bishops entitled . . . to seats in the House of Bishops . . .”  and “ . . . by a majority of the whole number of bishops entitled to vote.”  The language of the Canon has consistently required that a majority of all bishops entitled to vote, and not just a majority of those present at a meeting, must give their consent to the deposition of a bishop.  Although the language itself is clear, the definition contained in Title IV is even more specific.  Canon IV.15 specifically provides that “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.”

From a letter from the Bishops and Standing Committee of the Diocese of South Carolina to The Most Reverend Katharine Jefferts Schori, dated March 27, 2008.

http://www.cfdiocese.org/news/news08/0508pbletter.htm

Lambeth 2008