Joan Gundersen reported on this blog that the date of the Diocese of Pittsburgh's Convention would be moved up to October "so that there would be less time between such a deposition and the convention."
Now Bishop Duncan has published the notice of the change in convention dates, and states the reason for changing the dates: "The date and place of the Annual Convention having been previously set, I am announcing this change under the provisions of Article II, Section 2, of the Constitution of the Diocese. The expressed threat of deposition of the Diocesan Bishop at a September meeting of the House of Bishops is the “sufficient cause.” All of this confirms Joan Gundersen's statement.
Thinking Anglicans has the links to his letter and other materials related to this HERE.
Why the quick move to convention assuming the possibility of deposition? Gundersen's comment, "less time" is the answer.
With a quick move to Diocesan Convention following whatever actions the House of Bishops takes, the backlash from deposition (if that happens) could lead convention, chaired by the Standing Committee chair and helped along by the bishop as "consultant" might carry the day quite handily. If there was more time between deposition and convention cooler heads might prevail. Better to get on quickly.
Politics is a wonderful thing, and the Diocese of Pittsburgh is playing the political game of its life. Deposing the Bishop begins rapidly to suck the authority out of the room, and better to act quickly to find other sources of revival of authority. Quickly gaining recognition by another Province as a bishop in good standing and claiming to be part of another Province brings air back into the room, at least for the moment.
Bishop Venables might be well advised to look carefully before taking in Pittsburgh and its bishops, deposed or not. The political bug is shared in the best of fellowships and the most comfortable of beds. The rash lasts for a long time.
6/10/2008
6 comments:
OK... Comments, gripes, etc welcomed, but with some cautions and one rule:
Cautions: Calling people fools, idiots, etc, will be reason to bounce your comment. Keeping in mind that in the struggles it is difficult enough to try to respect opponents, we should at least try.
Rule: PLEASE DO NOT SIGN OFF AS ANONYMOUS: BEGIN OR END THE MESSAGE WITH A NAME - ANY NAME. ANONYMOUS commentary will be cut.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
"The political bug is shared in the best of fellowships and the most comfortable of beds. "
ReplyDeleteYeah - nice for you that TEC's leadership shuns politics and makes decisions full of integrity (eg BO33, eg accepting Gene Robinson being made a scapegoat.....)
It's very clear from this Blog that GC 2009 will give us more of the same. All of the threats, lawsuits, and etc. will continue. This Church will continue its spiral downwards...all thanks to the new institionalists who just don't understand that you can't have a Church without people.
ReplyDeleteEverybody is disposable...except lest they agree with the insanity that continues to isolate this tiny crowd of Christianity called TEC.
You can win the lawsuits, own miles of empty, indebted properties, but TEC (and the leading party-line bloggers therein) will never get the people back.
Never.
Readers not following all the inside baseball may infer different things from the quotations you put around "consultant". As we know from recent comments at your blog, Pittsburgh has made contractual arrangements to keep Duncan on as a consultant should he be deposed.
ReplyDeleteWhat I failed to understand is why TEC failed to act in March 2007 when the Westfield's Response document and GS Steering Com letter were revealed in the Calvary litigation. I again failed to understand why TEC didn't act when +Duncan attempted to force through the Articles on day 1 of the Common Cause Partnership meeting, articles that would have violated the TEC accession clause and whose acceptance, as written, was only stopped by +Stanton, precisely for that reason. This brings to mind the question of the inhibition and is it still possible? And, is it too late to reschedule a HofB meeting this summer, perhaps in England?
ReplyDeleteYou wrote: Deposing the Bishop begins rapidly to suck the authority out of the room
ReplyDeleteTrue, unless the authority has already been sucked out of the room by the hasty implementation a canonically flawed process.
God Forbid the good people of Pittsburg should have some time to think for themselves, they might decide the Southern Cone is not the promised land after all.
ReplyDeleteMakes you wonder just what the good bishop isn't telling them and why Bob is so worried about what will transpire if he is not in control.