11/22/2008

Recognizing that Moderator Duncan has been Deposed

It has been sixty-four days since Moderator Duncan was deposed. The sentence of deposition was signed on September 19th, 2008.. 

The Anglican Communion webpages has a provincial directory and when the Episcopal Church USA is clicked on, it opens a page listing the dioceses. The Diocese of Pittsburgh page still lists him as bishop.

When John David Schofield was deposed the change was made very quickly, first to vacent, then to Bishop Lamb when he was made provisional bishop.

Perhaps the long delay in correcting the page is simply due to the overwork of the communications staff, particularly given the near departure of Canon James Rosenthal.  Then again perhaps it has to do with the possibility that the Anglican Communion Office list is indirect evidence that changes, depositions, etc, are acknowledged by the servants of the Instruments of Unity and at least some of those Instruments are not interested in so acknowledging Moderator Duncan's change in status.

Meanwhile, the listing is incorrect and it would be helpful if the ACO would get their act together and declare the see vacant.

Two months is sufficent time to make one correction, don't you think?

36 comments:

  1. Or, it could be that it and the ABC know something that we in the US do not know.

    Schofield was and is, a loose canon in a china shop; therefore, good riddance.

    Duncan, on the other hand, has the backing of the terrorist primates for the job of Primate of the Americas. We all know that Williams has bent over backwards to make those primates as happy as they can be - given that they see him as an anachronism of a useless-to-them institution.

    Given Rowan's track record, I simply do not trust him to find a backbone when bullied.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Fr. Mark,
    Strange, I always thought Mr. stood for Mister not Moderator. I stand corrected.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Bennison is still listed under Penn, too.

    ReplyDelete
  4. John...Bennison is still not deposed, he is in inhibition land, but I think deposition will come soon.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Mark, if you are referring to the anglican.org domain, it is not official. The Society of Archbishop Justus runs it, now Rowan's people.

    ReplyDelete
  6. What is the significance of the departure of Jim Rosenthal?

    ReplyDelete
  7. ninh...nope..I was reffering to the Anglican Communion web site, and to this address:
    http://www.anglicancommunion.org/tour/diocese.cfm?Idind=686&view=alpha

    ReplyDelete
  8. Has someone contacted their webmaster to inquire?

    ReplyDelete
  9. Odd. I sent the website an e-mail about the listing for the Bishop of Pittsburgh about a week ago. They cannot be unaware of their incorrect information.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Or it could be that Bishop Duncan's "deposition" was illegal and invalid...not that that has ever stopped the ACC before...as you note they duly changed the official website listing after Bishop Schofield's faux deposition.

    Matt

    ReplyDelete
  11. I asked Anglicans Online why they hadn't changed where "pitsburgh.anglican.org" points and they said it was because the Episcopal Church hadn't officially communicated things to them yet.

    And, nice try, Matt. Very Orwellian.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Richard Warren22/11/08 8:25 PM

    Matt,

    What was it that made Mr. Schofield and Mr. Duncan's depositions illegal and invalid?

    ReplyDelete
  13. Regardless of how one views Bob Duncan's deposition he is now by his own choice and action no longer in the Episcopal Church USA, so he cannot be the bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh in the Episcopal Church USA.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Or it could be that Bishop Duncan's "deposition" was illegal and invalid

    No, it could not. In the REAL WORLD, where God is in God's Heaven, xDuncan's deposition was COMPLETELY valid, canonical, and justified.

    Peddle your "Up = Down" propaganda elsewhere, Mister Kennedy.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Goodness, Mark. It is, after all, just a website. It doesn't denote the AC's official recognition of anything, as its maintainers have pointed out in the past. It certainly doesn't tell us whether anyone thought that +Duncan's deposition was valid or not. If you think it's inaccurate, send them a note.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Only in the Episcopal Church do the executives quit first, then get fired, and then howl bloody murder over getting fired.

    Only in the Episcopal Church do resigned/fired executives try to take the branch office with all its assets with them out the door.

    Only the Episcopal Church would allow executives bent on its destruction to stay in the organization for years and years.

    ReplyDelete
  17. RB, actually the anglicancommunion.org IS an official website. I think you are confusing this with the web pages of anglicansonline.org which is indeed "unofficial."

    ReplyDelete
  18. They're waiting (like us all) to see what happens on 3rd December.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Methinks that our esteemed Executive Council member is more than peeved, and I'm glad that he has this opportunity to reconsider exactly what the rest of the world might think of TEC.

    But considering he and I share a diocese where the largest, richest church advertises communion to the unbaptized on its website, I guess I needn't fear that the shock of reality will awaken its priestly denizens anytime soon.

    ReplyDelete
  20. yawner...and were precisely is that? Christ Church Chritiana Hundred says the unbaptized are welcome to the Eucharist?

    ReplyDelete
  21. Yawner is aptly named.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Unfortunately Father Mark, it appears that they do!

    Frequently Asked Questions
    Do I have to be baptized or confirmed to participate in Holy Eucharist?
    No. All are welcome to receive the sacrament at Christ Church.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Maybe we can join together and buy an eraser for them.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Fr. Harris - they say exactly that. Check out their FAQ page, fourth question down: http://www.christchurchde.org/aboutus/faq.asp

    ReplyDelete
  25. yawner & BillyD...got it.

    Meanwhile, yawner, you know who I am, who are you. Delaware is a little state and perhaps we know each other outside the blogsphere.

    I had not seen the CCCH website before. I'll be asking the rector about this next time I see her. Meanwhile, I am not shocked by this. I suspect unbaptized persons are not likely to find their way down the little road to the church and suddenly want to receive communion.

    ReplyDelete
  26. I say feed them all and let God sort them out.

    ReplyDelete
  27. We are watching what appears to be the great crisis that has ever hit the Anglican Communion. It's not clear if it will be the greatest crisis to hit The Episcopal Church. Certainly the break up of General Convention during the American Civil War was a terrible, terrible thing.

    But as we recall, in those days General Convention took a higher road and just marked the missing dioceses "absent." And eventually, they not only came home, they were welcomed back. But they never ceased to be dioceses - they always were because the Church is not the stuff, it's the people. The people.

    It was kind of Rowan Williams and his wife to invite Bishop Duncan and his wife to their home after the action of TEC's House of Bishops to attempt to depose. It is act not only of British diplomacy, but most especially, Christian hospitality - and Rowan Williams' actions speaks louder than words.

    May we have eyes to see what our hearts, now growing hard, can no longer see.


    bb

    ReplyDelete
  28. Not that there is a Canon or anything that prohibits giving communion to the unbaptized. But then agaain this is the TEC, where all canons are equal but some canons are more equal than others.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Oh Heaven forbid we should allow the unwashed masses at Christ's table... That would be like letting Jesus eat with sinners and tax collectors...oops.

    I personally think that the best way to "do this in rememberance of me" is to share communion with the unbaptized. In the same way he offered himself to all, we share that sacrifice with all.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Baby Blue - really. The division during the Civil War was not instigated by the Church itself. The Church in the South found itself on one side of a secular, political border it had not created.

    The situation here is quite different. A bunch of rebellious members of some parishes and dioceses have created this situation, on supposedly theological grounds. They have voluntarily left. There is no point in marking them "absent."

    Uriel

    ReplyDelete
  31. Baby Blue... General Convention did not break up. For good a practical reasons the diocese in the Confederate States did not come. They did not resign or leave formally either. They were indeed absent.

    That may or may not have been a high road, but you are right, they never ceased to be dioceses of The Protestant Episcopal Church. They were not present at GC.

    Had the South won, and the CSA had survived, there would have been the need for conversations about how to remove those dioceses into a new Anglican Church, or perhaps to have a Church that spanned two countries. Thank God we did not have to do that.

    But the current troubles are not like that are they?

    And your comment about the ABC's invitation being a matter of caring for Moderator Duncan after the attempt to depose plays into my belief that the ABC does not believe he has been deposed or alternately that it doesn't matter.

    When the ABC receives someone as bishop, in spite of the ruling of that person's own Church, it is a political statement, not a matter of Christian hospitality.

    I firmly believe the ABC can be a person of great Christian hospitality, but I note that some of his moments of hospitality are less than Christian.

    He did not extend hospitality to the Bishop of New Hampshire to come to the Lambeth Conference, and does extend invitation to the deposed bishop of Pittsburgh to visit him at Lambeth Palace. I believe these are both political statements.

    About your last sentence...my prayer too.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Security guards with Bishop Robinson's photo were posted around Canterbury Cathedral with instructions to keep him out during the Lambeth Conference.

    "May we have eyes to see what our hearts, now growing hard, can no longer see."

    indeed.

    ReplyDelete
  33. It was kind of Rowan Williams and his wife to invite Bishop Duncan and his wife to their home after "the action of TEC's House of Bishops to attempt to depose. It is act not only of British diplomacy, but most especially, Christian hospitality - and Rowan Williams' actions speaks louder than words.

    May we have eyes to see what our hearts, now growing hard, can no longer see."

    No, make no mistake, Mr. Duncan was deposed. BB, you deny facts just as the rest of the reasserters deny inalienable rights to LGBT Christians. Their rights, just as Mr. Duncan's deposition, exist in fact. You heart, growing hard does not allow you to see what is in front of you.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Am I the only one who remembers Duncan's extremely petulant, snippy press conference in England just days after his meeting with Williams?

    And am I the only one who noticed that not long ago one of Duncan's mouthpieces decreed that Williams has surrendered all moral authority?

    Duncan might have gotten a cup of tea from Williams, but he clearly did not get what he really wanted from that meeting.

    ReplyDelete
  35. I am late with my response, but I will simply say this: I don't think visitors are as rare as you think to Christ Church. Any parish requiring a $25 "donation" to get reserved tickets (aka the only tickets) for a performance of Handel's Messiah will get visitors.

    You don't know me. And I'd rather not out my identity given that I maintain neutrality within my parish, as resistance is generally futile. We stay because we love the parish, even though the theology has us banging our heads against the wall on an almost-daily basis.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Yawner...thank you for the honesty of your response. Yes, resistance often feels futile and sometimes is, and I am glad you love your parish.

    Perhaps sometime, across the great divide we will recognize one another and smile.

    Bad theology often feels like a wall, but it is only bad theology. If Jesus can walk into rooms where the doors are closed, we can walk through the walls of bad theology. The place you begin is with love for people of a parish, for the parish, for the community.

    I only know this from the inverse of what I think you are saying. I too have loved a parish and cringed at the theology that was operating and felt I was banging my head against a wall.

    I wish I could say that I prevailed, but I did not. Instead, when the opportunity came for me to put my name in as a candidate for rector I did not. I have always wondered what might have happened if I had done so.

    We do what we can do.

    ReplyDelete

OK... Comments, gripes, etc welcomed, but with comment moderation 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.