Ft. Worth and Soon to be "Former Bishop Iker": So...Is It Really Fr. Scott Who Must Do This?

You people in Ft. Worth still looking for a reason to bring charges against Bishop Iker??? Here are the reasons in clear print. WAKE UP, LOVELIES! DO IT NOW.

I have a kind of blessed assurance that the house is just waiting for you to act. Take the step. You will find the support you need.

Blame me...please!

10 Reasons Why Now Is the Time to Realign

MR. CHAPMAN STANDING COMMITTEE MEMBER

One of our regular contributors and a bit of an expert on Canon/Constitutional Law (of the TEC variety) posted the following comment on the issue of inhibition/deposition:

"inhibition is in the hands of the bishop rather than the Ecclesiastical Authority. Absent a bishop being appointed as interim, there is no provision for inhibiting priests or deacons.

Moreover, since Pittsburgh has not provided by canon for a diocesan review committee under TEC Canon IV.3.1, the Standing Committee serves as the Diocesan Review Committee. It would hardly vote a presentment against one of its own members."

One of the changes I would like to see discussed and implemented in some form is the ability for the laity of a diocese to come forward and exercise the process of inhibition. For example, there is a memo out there called the Chapman Memo that has floated around for years. The memo (this time to reduce his notoriety I will NOT post the url) is a how to for the GAFCONites and the alphabet soup folks on how to de-associate a diocese from the Episcopal Church. It was written by a priest in the diocese of Pittsburgh. This priest also serves on the Standing Committee of the diocese that is following that memorandum to a T. If seems the Bishop can be deposed for his antics but the priest who wrote the directions cannot. It seems the bishop and every structure that he bishop has prohibits the laity from moving on this person in a manner that would excise the cancer from the diocese.

Now I understand that Mr. Duncan (Mr. has a nice ring to it doesn't it) is the head of the diocese but Mr. Chapman (wishful thinking) is the person that should be paying the price as well.

I propose that the general convention take this up and that it allow a full inhibition/deposition process against one of it's own bishops or priests or deacons with a full process supported by the staff and structure of the diocese. Since only clergy can depose clergy a built in safeguard would be a 60 day review period by the Presiding Bishop and in the case of a proposed deposition against a bishop the same 3 bishops with a final outing of the bishop by the HOB.

There you have it. What do you think?

New Website for Pittsburgh

I note the following new website...

Across The Aisle

"A theologically diverse group of Pittsburgh clergy and laity committed to remaining in The Episcopal Church."

Kudoes to St. Peter's, Brentwood, PA

Statement from St. Peter's Brentwood

According to the Rev'd. Philip Wainwright Rector of St. Peter's Brentwood
(Diocese of Pittsburgh)

St Peter's Brentwood voted tonight (September 24th 2008) to remain in the
Episcopal Church regardless of how the diocese votes on October 4th. 83
ballots were cast; 74 voted to stay, 8 to realign, and there was 1
abstention.

The majority of those who spoke expressed disagreement with the direction in
which the national church is going, but said they preferred to stay and work
for the reformation of the church.

H.T. to James

METHADONE BISHOPS

It has not taken Mr. Schofield very long to develop into a methadone bishop. This is a longing for and missing of all the fame and fortune and notoriety and press coverage one gets while being a real bishop. Actually, this is purple shirt envy and is enjoyed by the likes of Dan Martins. JDS is really a "methadone" type bishop. That is the type of bishop that has been deposed from the Episcopal Church but is received by some other bishop in a province far, far away. I believe it is the intermediate step to "coming off" an Episcopal Bishop and not yet willing to recognize themselves as ordinary lay persons like the rest of us. The intermediate step, methadone bishop, is where a deposed bishop pretends to act like a real bishop. There used to be a process called "cold turkey bishop" but people like Peter Jensen, Michael Nazir-Ali, Peter Akinola and Greg Venables decided the drug of bishop was too great to become a lay person automatically and so they came up with this "methadone bishop". This is a bishop who is in the process of becoming an ordinary lay person but is needed by these primates for a few months or years to bamboozle the rest of us before these methadone bishops are cut off completely from their daily fix of press coverage, exalted blessing status and the ultimate high of calling our presiding bishop and telling her "she is just a girl and we don't have to do anything you say!"

At any rate, our own methadone man, Mr. Schofield has published his latest Flying Leap and it is a doozey!

Let's begin with a respect issue. Mr. Schofield talks about the 5 California bishops and the one retired bishop that spoke out against Proposition 8. The retired bishop is none other than our own Bishop Jerry Lamb. Deposed bishop Schofield refuses to recognize the ONLY Bishop of the Diocese of San Joaquin, +Jerry Lamb. What a scofflaw! Mr. Schofield then says,

. . . A little background may provide some much needed help to clarify what is actually going on.
For some time, now - but not through the usual channels of placing an issue before the voting public. . . rather by granting a "right:" to a self proclaimed minority - courts in California have permitted same sex couples to be united in what appears to be a marriage even though it is well known that a measure dealing with this precise situation is to appear on the upcoming ballot.

Clearly JDS tries to twist reality into something he can fool the rest of his "flock".

Then in rapid order Mr. Schofield lies about the ACLU, The House of Bishops, and once again, the California Bishops. He then twists the intent of Proposition 8 and issues the death knell for the family. He does accurately portray himself as "hard, judgmental and unloving individuals". He then twists his interpretation of the Bible to meet his goals.

Now what is all this? Well, he continues to insulate himself and all the people he runs against the "evil outside world." JDS actually said to us, "I am the only thing that protects you from the rest of the world. If it was not for me, you would be just like them." The methadone man is at it again!

PETER JENSEN - ALSO RAN

We have a visitor from Australia, Brian R. He has had some experience with Peter Jensen. Turns out that the Primate for Australia is elected by vote every now and again. Seems, this is the time to do so. If we are very unlucky, our great and wonderful wizard of O's, Peter Jensen could be elected to the post. See Brian's comments:

Yes, sadly I am in Jensen's diocese but I attend St James, King Street which is known for standing out from the diocese, being liberal and anglo-catholic. Fortunately we are also wealthy so can thumb our nose at the Archbishop to a limited extent. eg. We have visiting women priests preaching but they can only be recognised as deacons while in the Sydney diocese and +Gene Robinson was welcomed as a visitor but could not take a role in the service
The people mentioned in the newspaper article are from outside Sydney and will question the diocese's activities via the General Synod of Australia. However the Sydney diocese due to its wealth and because it is now ordaining deacons who have no intention of proceeding to the priesthood, has, I think, over one third of the votes on the General Synod. It can be embarrassed, I hope, but not much more. There is an election for primate next month. The archbishop of Brisbane ++Aspinall is the primate at the moment. Please God it does not go to Jensen.
Brian R

Perhaps it would be interesting to contact their office and share our experiences with +Jensen. maybe, with a prayer and lot of email about who Peter Jensen really is they, the General Synod, will elect someone who is loving, compassionate and merciful.

Contact the General Synod Office
Level 9, 51 Druitt Street
SYDNEY NSW 2000

Phone: +61 2 8267 2700
Fax: +61 2 8267 2727
Email: gsoffice@anglican.org.au

Good luck and best wishes Brian. Our thoughts and prayers are with all our Real Anglican brothers and sisters in Australia!

UNCHRISTIAN BEHAVIOR IS ONE-WAY

Here is Mr. Duncan's attorney's interpretation of the deposition.

Attorney for Bishop Duncan Comments on "Deposition"
Document Actions


Editor's Note: John H. Lewis, attorney for Bishop Duncan, has released the following statement regarding the process used to "depose" Bishop Robert Duncan on September 18.


The so-called “deposition” of Bishop Duncan is illegal, unfair, and unchristian.

It is illegal because it violates numerous Canons of The Episcopal Church: 1) There has been no “abandonment.” Past precedents of the Episcopal Church show that the “abandonment” Canon cannot be used to punish a Bishop’s intentions; 2) The Canons require that any facts be considered by a Review Committee. Here, the Presiding Bishop has used facts from the committee she created to seize the property of orthodox dioceses and parishes; 3) The Canons require that a Bishop be “inhibited” before the matter can be submitted to the House of Bishops. Bishop Duncan was not “inhibited”; and 4) The Canons require that any vote to depose must have the vote of the majority of Bishops entitled to vote. The House of Bishops consists of 290 voting members, meaning that 146 votes are necessary to depose a Bishop. Here, only 88 bishops voted "yes" to “depose” Bishop Duncan. This last point is acknowledged even by the official statement issued on behalf of the bishops meeting in Salt Lake City, which summarizes the vote tally, while at the same time citing the correct standard: "a majority of the House of Bishops" rather than the false standard adopted by the Presiding Bishop – a majority of those bishops who are present for a meeting.

It is unfair because Bishop Duncan was denied his fundamental right – the right to a church trial. He has been denied that right because the Presiding Bishop believes that his “deposition” will assist her in her desire to seize the property of the Diocese of Pittsburgh.

It is unchristian because Bishop Duncan is being punished for his faithful submission to the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Let me say this:

1, Mr. Duncan has violated individual biblical rights rights to live in a relationship with their God.

2, Mr. Duncan has denied thousands of Episcopalians their fundamental civil rights by not allowing the full inclusion of LGBT folks in the Episcopal Church.

3, it is unchristian to not receive communion with all Christians. It is unchristian to not permit everyone full access to their Lord and Savior.

If this letter was designed to engender sympathy the good attorney needs to know it only creates more ill-will. Mr. Duncan would do well to admit his erroneous stance, ask forgiveness and go into a Monastery.

++JENSEN GOT SOME 'SPLAININ' TO DO

This is from the Sydney Morning Express. I found this after visiting our one true Christian and bible teacher. Thanks and a tip of the hat.

THE Archbishop of Sydney, Peter Jensen, is helping to organise a breakaway faction of the global Anglican Church that is opposed to same-sex blessings and the consecration of gay clergy from his diocesan headquarters at St Andrews House.

The controversial move has angered moderates in the Australian church.

The postbox address for the Sydney diocese and its bishops is the central contact point for the movement that emerged from a meeting of more than 1000 Anglican conservatives in Jerusalem last month.

Those supporting the movement's call for a return to strict literal interpretations of the Bible have been invited to become members of the Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans and send expressions of interest to the Sydney postbox.

Dr Jensen was appointed secretary to its primates' council in London last month.

The diocese denies that Dr Jensen's new position means the GAFCON movement will be administratively headquartered in Sydney. "The Archbishop is the secretary to the primates' council, an honorary position. He does not have a vote on the primates' council - which is assisted by an advisory board," a spokesman said.

The prominent Melbourne liberal Muriel Porter said she regarded the movement as subversive and would raise the matter at a meeting of the general synod's standing committee in Sydney next month. "The decision to host GAFCON is going to cause real concern among many Anglicans in Australia," she said. "It is an alternative international Anglican structure rivalling the archbishop of Canterbury and the primates and all of the other bodies of the Anglican Communion."

Robert Fordham, Australia's lay representative on the Anglican Consultative Council, the international organisation of the Anglican Communion that is trying to resolve the tensions in the global church, said he would ask the archbishop to explain himself.

"To join an organisation as an archbishop and even more significantly have the diocesan office as the Australian headquarters of this organisation is a matter of grave concern," he said.

Well, it seems ++Jensen will be busy for a while. And well it should be! All the provinces that have primates running around the globe NOT tending to their flocks should be hauled up before their respective "Standing Committees" and asked to explain these extravagant and lavish trips around the world while on the dime of the province. They should be told to take care of their province and leave everyone else alone.

Preface to the Book of Common Prayer

This document should be better known by Episcopalians, and Anglicans around the world would do well to read it carefully. It was published in 1789 as the Preface to the first Prayer Book of the Episcopal Church and has remained the Preface of every Prayer Book revision since. [emphases mine]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

IT is a most invaluable part of that blessed liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, that in his worship, different forms and usages may without offence be allowed, provided the substance of the Faith be kept entire; and that, in every Church, what cannot be clearly determined to belong to Doctrine must be referred to Discipline: and therefore, by common consent and authority, may be altered, abridged, enlarged, amended, or otherwise disposed of, as may seem most convenient for the edification of the people, "according to the various exigencies of times and occasions."

The Church of England, to which the Protestant Episcopal Church in these States is indebted, under God, for her first foundation and a long continuance of nursing care and protection, hath, in the Preface of her Book of Common Prayer, laid it down as a rule, that "The particular forms of Divine Worship, and the Rites and Ceremonies appointed to be used therein, being things in their own nature indifferent and alterable, and so acknowledged, it is but reasonable that upon weighty and important considerations, according to the various exigencies of times and occasions, such changes and alterations should be made therein; as to those who are in places of authority should, from time to time, seem either necessary or expedient.”

The same Church hath not only in her Preface, but likewise in her Articles and Homilies declared the necessity and expediency of occasional alterations and amendments in her Forms of Public Worship; and we find accordingly, that, seeking to "keep the happy mean between too much stiffness in refusing, and too much easiness in admitting variations in things once advisedly established", she hath, in the reign of several Princes since the first compiling of her Liturgy in the time of Edward the Sixth upon just and weighty considerations her thereunto moving yielded to make such alterations in some particulars, as in their respective times were thought convenient; yet so as that the main body and essential parts of the same (as well in the chiefest materials as in the frame and order thereof) have still been continued firm and unshaken.

Her general aim in these different reviews and alterations hath been, as she farther declares in her said Preface "to do that which according to her best understanding, might most tend to the preservation of peace and unity in the Church; the procuring of reverence, and the exciting of piety and devotion in the worship of God; and finally the cutting off occasion, from them that seek occasion, of cavil or quarrel against her Liturgy." And although, according to her judgment, there be not "any thing in it contrary to the Word of God or to sound doctrine, or which a godly man may not with a good conscience use and submit unto, or which is not fairly defensible, if allowed such just and favourable construction as in common equity ought to be allowed to all human writings;" yet upon the principles already laid down, it cannot but be supposed that further alterations would in time be found expedient. Accordingly, a commission for a review was issued in the year 1689: but this great and good work miscarried at that time; and the Civil Authority has not since thought proper to revive it by any new commission.

But when in the course of Divine Providence, these. American States became independent with respect to civil government, their ecclesiastical independence was necessarily included; and the different religious denominations of Christians in these States were left at full and equal liberty to model and organize their respective Churches, and forms of worship, and discipline, in such manner as they might judge most convenient for their future prosperity; consistently with the constitution and laws of their country.

The attention of this Church was in the first place drawn to those alterations in the Liturgy which became necessary in the prayers for our Civil Rulers, in Consequence of the Revolution. And the principal care herein was to make them conformable to what ought to be the proper end of all such prayers, namely, that "Rulers may have grace, wisdom, and understanding to execute justice, and to maintain truth;" and that the people "may lead quiet and peaceable lives, in all godliness and honesty."

But while these alterations were in review before the Convention, they could not but, with gratitude to God, embrace the happy occasion which was offered to them (uninfluenced and unrestrained by any worldly authority whatsoever) to take a further review of the Public Service, and to establish such other alterations and amendments therein as might be deemed expedient.

It seems unnecessary to enumerate all the different alterations and amendments. They will appear, and it is to be hoped, the reasons of them also, upon a comparison of this with the Book of Common Prayer of the Church of England. In which it will also appear that this Church is far from intending to depart from the Church of England in any essential point of doctrine, discipline, or worship; or further than local circumstances require.

And now, this important work being brought to a conclusion, it is hoped the whole will be received and examined by every true member of our Church. and every sincere Christian, with a meek, candid, and charitable frame of mind; without prejudice or prepossessions; seriously considering what Christianity is, and what the truths of the Gospel are; and earnestly beseeching Almighty God to accompany with his blessing every endeavour for promulgating them to mankind, in the clearest, plainest, most affecting and majestic manner, for the sake of Jesus Christ, our blessed Lord and Saviour.

ARCHBISHOP ROWAN WILLIAMS

Sometimes I browse around places I probably should not be. I came across this letter on the "Anglican Mainstream" website. This letter demonstrates the utter lack of understanding and knowledge most clergy (especially those outside the United States) have of how our beloved Episcopal Church works. And on top of everything else, some flunky retired guy from the Southern Cone writes this piece of tripe like we cannot figure out who it is really from? Heads up, yes we were born, just not last night! If this letter does not make your "blood boil" you must not be a real Anglican.

We call for the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Right Reverend Rowan D. Williams to respond immediately with a letter sanctioning this "former bishop" as well as the current Archbishop of the Southern Cone and the Primates Council for continuing to interfere in the internal workings of the Episcopal Church of the United States.

Here is the letter.

The Rt. Hon. and Most Reverend Rowan D. Williams, Lambeth Palace,, London SE1 7JU.

OPEN LETTER

Your Grace,

I write to you as a former primate of the Southern Cone and bishop of Chile, a Diocese which has enjoyed a Companion Relationship with the Diocese of Pittsburgh since 1978. It is a privilege to count Rt. Rev. Robert Duncan as one of my friends as well as a brother bishop, having known him since his consecration fifteen years ago.

You can imagine, therefore, my surprise on hearing that the Presiding Bishop of the Protestant Episcopal Church of the United States of America had accused Bishop Duncan of abandoning the church and had successfully moved in the House of Bishops that he should be deposed as a minister in the Church of God. I know Bishop Duncan to be an orthodox Christian believer, who has taught the biblical Anglican faith throughout his ministry. I understand on good authority that the process of his deposition has run counter to the canons of that church.

I write, therefore, to ask that you take immediate action in suspending the Episcopal Church from any further participation in activities of the Anglican Communion and in calling a meeting of the Primates to give formal recognition to a new Province in North America, as desired by the Common Cause Partners Federation. At that meeting the Primates must give guidance as to the future conduct of the Episcopal Church so as to enable it to return to the full fellowship of the Anglican Communion .

The action of Archbishop Gregory Venables in receiving Bishop Duncan as a member of the House of Bishops of the province of the Southern Cone should not be seen in any way as interference in another province, but as a fraternal act towards a brother who has, for a long time, been speaking out for biblical truth in a church which, by its teaching and actions, has been gradually separating itself from the rest of the Communion. He deserves our gratitude and full support.

You are in my prayers and those of many others, that you will have God’s wisdom and despatch in dealing with this further tear in the fabric of our Communion, especially in view of your own pleas for holy restraint at the Lambeth Conference.

With every good wish

Colin F. Bazley

Hon. Assistant Bishop of Chester

++William, Lambeth made it clear these forays were to cease immediately. TEC has done nothing to warrant this interference and yet here they all are again, trying to do significant damage to our church. We would expect a quick and forceful response that removes them from the Anglican Communion. Apparently nothing short of that will suffice. They regard the Lambeth statements as nothing more than trifle from old fools. Do not let this act go unpunished!

REAL ANGLI "CANS"

Hello world! A small group of us have opened up a more freewheeling area for those of you who are undergoing changes. The Diocese of Forth Worth and the Diocese of Pittsburgh, to name but two. We also understand that the Diocese Quincy is considering a move to the southern climes. We are also aware that several more dioceses are in the process of becoming something they perhaps do not wish to become. You are all welcome to post here at Real Anglicans. We call ourselves the real Anglicans because among other things, we subscribe to the doctrine, discipline and worship of the Episcopal Church in the United States of America AND/including tradition, scripture and reason. We believe that Episcopalians are, in fact, the only real Anglicans in the United States. In the last few years, groups have been trying to abscond with the most revered of names, and we have decided wrest it from the grip of imposters. "It" being the name Anglican. We have had enough of those scalawags in places such as Nigeria, Kenya, Sydney, the "Southern Cone," and Rwanda - to name but a few - stealing land, property and the good name of Anglican. We believe that uncaring, unthinking and fundamentalist persons should not be allowed to besmirch our good name and traditions. We are prepared to cross pens with anyone thinking otherwise. Fortunately, when you are in our ballpark you play by our rules or you move on. As authors of this blog we get the last word and we intend to use it.

To our brothers and sisters throughout the country: we know you are hurt, and we know you are angry and this blog is the place to vent. We also know you may need thoughts and ideas as well as prayers for how to proceed. We are hopeful that those from the Diocese of San Joaquin will also post helpful hints and ideas. We are also hopeful that from time to time a "bigwig" may cruise by and pick up an idea or two they can use -- or perhaps leave an idea or two. A sage once told me that if two persons each give the other a quarter and walk away then each still only has a quarter. However, if two persons each give the other an idea then walk away they each have two ideas. We hope you each gain at least that much.

Those who live on the dark side are welcome to post here -- beware we will delete those posts that are abusive -- we do know the difference between edgy and abusive.

A personal note in closing. We are madly, wildly and passionately in love with our Lord, Jesus Christ. We came to this conclusion through our beloved Episcopal Church. Truly we struggle from time to time but scripture, reason and tradition bring us through every time. Our God is madly, wildly passionately in love with us and sent Jesus to make sure we knew that. Trust us when we say we will no longer stand idly by and allow some group of thugs parading around as God's chosen stealing from us God's poem of love to us. Forewarned is forearmed.