The letter from Bishop Minns regarding the conclusion to discussions with Bishop Lee of Virginia regarding his post as Rector of Truro Church has been posted on Titusonenine, usually an impeccable site. It is posted on VirtueOnLine as well, but without source attribution. The link for its source document on Titusonenine does not work as of midnight Friday EDT. Nor is there any notice on the Diocese of Virginia or Truro Church websites. As of the moment there is no verification of the posting on Titusonenine, and nothing else to indicate a source beyond that of "babybluecafe". When it was listed on "babybluecafe" it was with a picture of Bishop Minns and was the first posting on the blog.
Fr. Jake is correct in saying that this solution, if true, is a gracious one. He speaks of Bishop Minns as a bishop of the church, a point that I believe honors the office even as we may criticize the position the office holder occupies.
Bishop Minns is now signing off as Bishop of CANA, indicating that he is “in charge” of this missionary effort, not simply a part of a mission presence. That he takes incursion into the Episcopal Church on behalf of the Church of Nigeria as “missionary” is of course the issue. He is plainly stating that he is part of a church (the Church of Nigeria) that believes that the Episcopal Church is heretical and not part of the Anglican Communion.
The report that Bishop Lee has licensed Bishop Minns to continue as rector of Truro Church is puzzling to me. Bishop Minns is bishop precisely because the Province in which he is ordained is no longer in communion with the Episcopal Church. To grant him license in the Diocese of Virginia is odd, to say the least.
Assuming the letter is genuine, Bishop Lee has exercised extraordinary restraint and good will. This would not be unlike him. Bishop Lee is an extraordinary person.
But why is this letter not confirmed by any source save a site called “babybluecafe”? And why doesn’t the link work anymore. And why has that report not been repeated by other reputable sources, or the semi-reputable sources, have not posted this. And why is this not posted on the Diocese of Virginia, ENS, or even CANA’s web site?
What’s going on?
I was put on to this by a reputable reporter who raised the question as to the validity of all this. Depending on the outcome I will be more than happy to give that reporter credit for the question.
But for now the question remains: Why is this letter posted only with a reference whose link no longer references the letter?