Translating the Appellate Decision in the San Joaquin Case

From the Anglican Curmudgeon -

As briefly reported in this previous post, the Fifth District Court of Appeal today reversed the grant of summary adjudication by the Fresno trial court in favor of the Episcopal Church (USA) and Bishop Jerry Lamb. It held that the trial court should not have adjudicated the issue of who was the proper Bishop of San Joaquin, with entitlement to the assets of the departed Diocese of San Joaquin (now called the "Anglican Diocese of San Joaquin").

This article continues with an extensive review of the decision. Please read the rest of Mr Haley's analysis at the Anglican Curmudgeon.

Appellate Court Issues Order to Show Cause in San Joaquin

Sorry folks, I'm falling behind. Here is a legal update from The Anglican Curmudgeon:

"Word was received this afternoon [9-22-09] that the Fifth District Court of Appeal has formally accepted Bishop Schofield's petition to review the ruling and order entered by the trial court granting Bishop Lamb's and ECUSA's motion for summary adjudication. This means that the trial court's decision and ruling are suspended pending a determination by the Court of Appeal, and the entry of a new order either vacating the trial court's ruling, or directing the entry of a new summary adjudication."

Read the rest here at the Anglican Curmudgeon.

What They Saw Is Exactly What They Got

Journalists and others frequently ask for a factual list of what the problems/trends are with The Episcopal Church. For those of you who have looked for such a detailed list, here is an excerpt from an informative list and analysis posted by the Anglican Curmudgeon:

2. The amount of its resources which ECUSA is devoting to litigation in the civil courts has multiplied even more enormously. As detailed in this post, ECUSA's budget for litigation went from an original estimate (at GC 2006) of $300,000 for the triennium 2007-2009 to a currently budgeted $4,704,138 for that same triennium, plus a further $1.8 million proposed to be budgeted for the next three years, for a total of over $6.5 million.

3. The number of clergy deposed since November 2006 (when the Presiding Bishop's term began) comes to 121 --- and counting. (With the recent action in San Joaquin, the number more than doubled.) That number is up from just 36 in the years 2004-2006 --- nearly a fourfold increase. (The details---excluding San Joaquin---are on pages 22-25 of this Report.) And now there are a potential 72 more depositions scheduled in Fort Worth.

4. Three bishops were "deposed" (not canonically) under the current Presiding Bishop, while she "deemed" another six to have voluntarily renounced their orders --- without their ever having in fact done so (see page 25 for details). That makes nine bishops removed in less than thirty-six months without bothering so much as once to observe the canonical procedures. (Previously, such an abuse had occurred only once in Presiding Bishop Griswold's term, and once in Presiding Bishop Browning's term; no one saw them for the canonical violations they were at the time, but an illegality can never serve as a precedent. And counting those two, there had been just five bishops of ECUSA deposed in the entire four-hundred year history of the Church, before Presiding Bishop Schori started her current campaign.)

The entire post is here.

Bishops' Statement on the Polity of the Episcopal Church

The following is an excerpt from "Bishops' Statement on the Polity of the Episcopal Church" Written by: The Anglican Communion Institute, Inc. Wednesday, April 22nd, 2009 II The Fundamental Structure of The Episcopal Church Is That of a Voluntary Association of Equal Dioceses Given the constitutional reservation of authority within the diocese to the Bishop and Standing Committee, it is not surprising that the fundamental structure of our Church is that of a voluntary association of equal dioceses. It is significant that the same term, "voluntary association," has been used by both the founding father of The Episcopal Church to describe the organization he was so instrumental in forming and by the civil law to describe religious societies and other unincorporated voluntary organizations in general. Our Church's primary architect was, of course, William White, and his blueprint was The Case of the Episcopal Churches in the United States Considered, published in 1782 as the Revolutionary War was nearing an end. As a result of American independence, many of the former Church of England parishes had become independent churches while others were still organized as state churches under the control of state legislatures. White's concept, later accepted by others in the former colonies, was that the Anglican churches would first be organized into state churches and then the state churches would organize themselves nationally as a voluntary association of state churches (now called "dioceses"). Pursuant to this plan, White was one of the first two Americans consecrated by the Archbishop of Canterbury in 1787 to serve in the Episcopal Churches. When The Episcopal Church eventually was duly organized in 1789, Bishop White and Bishop Samuel Seabury, consecrated by the Scottish Episcopal Church, sat as the first House of Bishops at the first General Convention. Just as the thirteen states were the "independent and sovereign" constituents of the American confederation that existed when the church now known as The Episcopal Church was being formed, the state churches were the bodies that combined to constitute what was initially called the Protestant Episcopal Church. It was the dioceses, then co-extensive with the newly-independent states, that created our Church's Constitution and General Convention. The constitutional mechanisms of governance they created preserved their status as equal members of a voluntary association of dioceses. As noted by the official commentary on our Constitution and canons, "Before their adherence to the Constitution united the Churches in the several states into a national body, each was completely independent." It then describes that national body they created as "a federation of equal and independent Churches in the several states." As this brief summary of our founding history shows, the fundamental structure of The Episcopal Church from the outset has been that of a voluntary association of dioceses meeting together in a General Convention as equals. This structure is clearly reflected in our Constitution. There is no provision in the Constitution that defines a diocese. The dioceses are the undefined constituent elements out of which The Episcopal Church is formed. In contrast, General Convention is created and defined in Article I, which still provides in language virtually unchanged from the original that "The Church in each diocese which has been admitted to union with the General Convention…shall be entitled to representation…." As this current language makes clear, "Churches" in dioceses are not created by General Convention. They are "admitted" (upon their application and its acceptance) to union with the General Convention. Dioceses are both historically and ontologically prior to the Constitution and the General Convention. And upon admission, it is the diocese, not any other body or group, that is "entitled to representation" at General Convention. This fundamental concept of dioceses as equal constituent members of The Episcopal Church is manifest in the mechanisms of governance created by the Constitution, including the provisions for representation and voting at General Convention, the means by which the Book of Common Prayer and Constitution are amended, and the procedures by which new dioceses are admitted to membership in The Episcopal Church after they are constituted. The full text of the document may be found here - http://www.anglicancommunioninstitute.com/?p=391

Legal Analysis and Opinion on San Joaquin Lawsuit

A.S. Haley has provided a detailed analysis and update on the lawsuit in San Joaquin on his blog: "Anglican Curmudgeon"

The entire article is here.

Did you know . . . ?

These are the current (2006) canonical requirements that the clergy in The Episcopal Church are obligated to follow prior to celebrating a marriage:

Sec. 2. Before solemnizing a marriage the Member of the Clergy shall have ascertained:
(a) That both parties have the right to contract a marriage according to the laws of the State.
(b) That both parties understand that Holy Matrimony is a physical and spiritual union of a man and a woman, entered into within the community of faith, by mutual consent of heart, mind, and will, and with intent that it be lifelong.

And

[Sec. 3.]
(d) The Member of the Clergy shall have required that the parties sign the following declaration:
(e) "We, A.B. and C.D., desiring to receive the blessing of Holy Matrimony in the Church, do solemnly declare that we hold marriage to be a lifelong union of husband and wife as it is set forth in the Book of Common Prayer.
(f) "We believe that the union of husband and wife, in heart, body, and mind, is intended by God for their mutual joy; for the help and comfort given one another in prosperity and adversity; and, when it is God's will, for the procreation of children and their nurture in the knowledge and love of the Lord.
(g) "And we do engage ourselves, so far as in us lies, to make our utmost effort to establish this relationship and to seek God's help thereto."

Sec. 4. It shall be within the discretion of any Member of the Clergy of this Church to decline to solemnize any marriage.

[Excerpts: pages 56 & 57 of the Constitution and Canons of the 2006 General Convention]

It is my understanding that all of TEC's California diocesan bishops have publicly opposed Prop 8. Do you suppose they will be inhibited for abandoning the doctrine, discipline and worship of the Church?

Holy Orders are Valid in World Wide Communion

Diocese of San Joaquin (Anglican)

Fresno, California

October 17, 2008

Anglican Holy Orders Valid in California and World Wide

On December 8, 2007 an overwhelming majority of the priests and deacons serving in the Diocese of San Joaquin, representing over 40 churches, chose to remain with Bishop John-David Schofield and the Diocese of San Joaquin and were officially admitted, along with the diocese, into the Province of the Southern Cone.

The Holy Orders of those clergy are recognized across the world wide Anglican Communion. Any decision made by The Episcopal Church concerning the exercise of ministry by the Clergy in the Anglican Diocese of San Joaquin is irrelevant and of no effect.

As Bishop Jerry Lamb noted in his October 10th Friday Reflection, the inhibition of Anglican Clergy in San Joaquin “implies no moral judgment of an individual clergy person. It speaks only about the person’s relationship to the Episcopal Church. The person can of course function in another church that may recognize their ordination.”

Bishop Lawrence Reports on the House of Bishops' Meeting, September 17-19, 2008

The following is an excerpt from a report by Bp Mark Lawrence regarding the proceedings at the most recent H.O.B. meeting:

There are so many dubious dimensions to this current proceeding against Bishop Duncan that to continue on this path, trampling upon the plain reading and purpose of the Canon in the process, may well give pause to all and cause many of us to shudder. Consider:

• There is the torturous reading of the Canon in order to render moot the clear reference to the necessity of inhibition prior to deposition. The fact is that Bishop Duncan has not been inhibited. The fact is that the three Senior Bishops of this church have not consented.

• There is the disputed reading of that phrase in the Canon which reads “…a majority of the whole number of Bishops entitled to vote.” The Constitution and Canons interpret that phrase in Article I:3, and in Canon IV itself, under section 15, which defines the very terminology used in the title! Under the ruling by the Presiding Bishop and her Chancellor, it is possible for a smaller number of Bishops to consent to the deposition of a Bishop than the number required to consent to the resignation of a Bishop. It is respectfully submitted that such an interpretation makes no sense, and turns the Canon on its head.

• There are real questions regarding the adequacy of due process in this case—a sacred principle of judicial practice in our society.

• There are significant questions in this matter that may suggest to some minds a conflict of interest.

• Along with these above concerns, there are the pervasive moral and pastoral dimensions which cannot be so easily dismissed as some would like us to believe. The statement last evening regarding the case of All Saints’ Pawleys Island vs. Diocese of South Carolina may have been well intended, but the fact is that the lawsuit has brought financial cost (thereby diminishing the funds available for missions) and spiritual unrest within the Diocese of South Carolina. The suggestion that swift action averted discord and legal proceeding is just not accurate. The description last evening of the situation within the Diocese of San Joaquin, while it may be one person’s recent experience, bears little resemblance to what was my experience serving in that diocese for the last ten years and living there for the first 30 plus years of my life.

• Having served in the Diocese of Pittsburgh and the Diocese of San Joaquin for almost all of my ordained ministry, I can tell you that the pastoral and theological matters that have precipitated the actions of their conventions will not be resolved by depositions or litigation, especially when the principles of due process and rule of law seem to be high-handedly ignored.

- The Rt Rev Mark Lawrence, Bishop of South Carolina

The full report is posted at the Episcopal Diocese of South Carolina's website, HERE.

Three More Dioceses Complain About Bishop's Depositons

Three American dioceses have written to US Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori asking her to revisit the deposition of Bishops John-David Schofield and William Cox by the House of Bishops last March, arguing the procedures used violated canon law and common justice.

The standing committees and diocesan boards—the governing bodies of American dioceses-of Central Florida, Northern Indiana and Springfield last month released independent letters raising concerns over the legality of the proceedings.

In a letter dated May 15, and published on its diocesan website on May 22, Central Florida voiced its “strong protest” to the “failure to follow the Canons” by the House of Bishops in the “recent depositions of Bishops Schofield and Cox.”

Central Florida said the interpretation of the canons used to punish the two bishops did not conform to church law, citing with approval an analysis of the proceedings prepared by the Diocese of South Carolina, which along with the Diocese of Western Louisiana had earlier registered its formal protest to the proceedings. [article continues]

Read it all on George Conger's blog

Bishop Adams: Why some may say that the Episcopal Church is no longer a member of the Anglican Communion

June 2, 2008

A very interesting and disturbing phenomenon has occurred due to a reinterpretation of the Canons of the Episcopal Church. The decision was made to use a Canon formed to ease the transition for a priest to leave the Anglican Church (of which The Episcopal Church is a part) and go to another Apostolic faith community without trial or expenses, non-necessary paperwork and meetings, which a regular renunciation would have required.

A good Canon constructed to work as Christians together in one faith: when spiritual disciplines change and new callings and discernment lead us apart. But now that same Canon has been reinterpreted to mean that a bishop may depose a priest when they disagree or when that clergyperson sees that they can no longer remain in the Episcopal Church, but she/he may be called to another Anglican entity (Province, Church, Ministry) which shares, supposedly, the same faith and Holy Orders.

It has been used nearly 300 times in the past six years. The words have been reinterpreted to speak to a Bishop and his/her clergy instead of a Holy Order within the whole of the Anglican Communion. The interpretation now leans to saying that people are ordained to this Church (TEC) and not to the worldwide Communion.

This has been extended to bishops for the first time and now all pretence of investigation, trial, evidence and Anglican identity can be ignored to solve problems that should be dealt with pastorally. [the article continues]

Read the rest of the article at VirtueOnline.