For all Episcopalians afraid of the "E" word

A "Easy Evangelism" T-Shirt!

Get yours today!

Be Thou My Vision

A Collect for Saturdays

Almighty God, who after the creation of the world rested from all your works and sanctified a day of rest for all your creatures: Grant that we, putting away all earthly anxieties, may be duly prepared for the service of your sanctuary, and that our rest here upon earth may be a preparation for the eternal rest promised to your people in heaven; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

A musical meditation so that we may be duly prepared for the service of the Lord's sanctuary on the morrow.

New Blogger in the Diocese of Albany

Welcome to the new blogger in the Diocese of Albany, Deacon Frank Lockwood.

Subcutaneous Sinsick Blues

Another gem from anglicanbeachparty

Dear Bob????!!!!!

For something as momentous and painful as deposing a Bishop from his ministry and, in effect, excommunicating an entire diocese, don't you think something a bit more formal than "Dear Bob" is called for? This woman is so lacking in class. And doesn't she have a secretary, for crying out loud? When I worked at 815, if I had allowed something like this to get past me and embarrass my boss, I would have had to answer for it.

The Episcopal Church
The Most Reverend Katharine Jefferts Schori
Presiding Bishop and Primate

September 22, 2008

Robert W. Duncan
125 N. Linden Ave.
Pittsburgh, PA 15208

Dear Bob,

I wanted to write you personally to inform you that following the House of Bishop’s decision to consent to your deposition, of which you are already aware, I have signed the Sentence of Deposition, a copy of which is enclosed.

I think the press statement following the vote accurately sets forth the prayerful and thoughtful atmosphere of the discussions.

Please know that I urged the bishops gathered to hold you in prayer, and to do what they can to maintain a pastoral relationship with you. I pray that you may know the peace of Jesus Christ, and I remain

Your servant in Christ,


Katharine Jefferts Schori

From t19

Statement from the Province of Southeast Asia on the Deposition of the Bishop of Pittsburg

22nd Sept 2008

We received with great distress the news of the deposition of the Rt Revd Bob Duncan, the Bishop of Pittsburgh, by the House of Bishops (HOB) of The Episcopal Church (TEC).

The Communion has repeatedly asked TEC to make pastoral provisions and avoid steps that will alienate further those within TEC who wish to live by the Anglican faith which they believe to be true and remain in fellowship within the Anglican Communion. Even as recent as at the recent Lambeth, the great majority of Bishops present, including those from TEC, have expressed sincere desire for healing and reconciliation and to observe restraints on contentious issues for the Windsor-Covenant process to proceed.

The HOB has instead proceeded to depose a faithful bishop of the Gospel and the diocese under his care. This raises serious questions yet again, and more strikingly so soon after Lambeth, as to how sincere TEC and some of its bishops are in wanting to bring reconciliation, healing and resolution to the Communion crisis at hand.

The Province of Southeast Asia will continue to support, remain in full communion and prayerfully explore steps to strengthen our shared life with Anglican leaders like Bishop Bob Duncan and the Diocese of Pittsburgh as well as other TEC bishops who respect the mind of the Communion and remain faithful to the teaching of Scripture as expressed in the tradition and life of the Church. We urge those who have not chosen to ‘walk apart’ to work actively and sincerely with the Windsor-Covenant Process and other measures agreed at the Communion level. This is probably the only remaining opportunity to bind the Communion together out of this crisis which will strengthen our future common life, witness in the world and our place as an Anglican ecclesial family within the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.

Most Rev’d Dr John Chew
Province of Southeast Asia

Bishop Duncan responds to "deposition"

e+News Release- September 18, 2008

BISHOP DUNCAN'S STATEMENT ON HIS "DEPOSITION"

It is a very sad day for The Episcopal Church. It is a sad day for me, a faithful son of that church.

Nevertheless it is also a hopeful day, hopeful because of the unstoppable Reformation that is overtaking the Christian Church in the West. It is also a hopeful day for me personally as I am unanimously welcomed into the House of Bishops of the Anglican Province of the Southern Cone, an act applauded by Anglican archbishops, bishops, clergy and people all around the world.

The Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh will move forward under its new Ecclesiastical Authority, its Standing Committee. That body will carry the diocese through to our realignment vote on October 4. With the success of that vote, it will be possible that we be joined together again as bishop and people.

I offer my deepest thanks to the company of saints all around the globe who have sustained me, my work and all who are dear to me in these days.

Robert Duncan

Bishop Duncan received into Province of Southern Cone

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh
September 18, 2008

DIOCESE OF PITTSBURGH MAINTAINS COURSE AFTER PURPORTED DEPOSITION

The House of Bishops purported deposition of Bishop Robert Duncan will not change the agenda for the Oct. 4 Diocesan Convention or change Bishop Duncan's status as a bishop in good standing within the Anglican Communion.

The action of the House of Bishops, which was taken in a closed meeting on September 18 in Salt Lake City, Utah, contravenes numerous canons of The Episcopal Church. While Bishop Duncan continues to believe that the "deposition" is unlawful, he will not challenge the "deposition" prior to the end of the diocese's October 4 convention unless forced to do so by the leadership of The Episcopal Church.

On October 4, diocesan convention deputies will consider the second reading of a constitutional change that would realign the diocese with the Province of the Southern Cone. With the passage of that constitutional change, the diocese will be free to welcome Bishop Duncan back as its bishop. In the meantime, under the diocese's governing documents, the standing committee will serve as the diocese's ecclesiastical authority.

"This is of course a very painful moment for Pittsburgh Episcopalians. The leadership of The Episcopal Church has inserted itself in a most violent manner into the affairs and governance of our diocese. While we await the decision of the diocesan convention on realignment to a different province of the Anglican Communion, we will stand firm against any further attempts by those outside our boundaries intimidate us," said the Rev. David Wilson, president of the Standing Committee.

Bishop Duncan's own continuing status as a bishop in The Anglican Communion has been secured by the Province of the Southern Cone.

"As was resolved by resolution made at the Provincial Synod in Valparaiso last November 2007, we are happy to welcome Bishop Duncan into the Province of the Southern Cone as a member of our House of Bishops, effective immediately. Neither the Presiding Bishop nor the House of Bishops of the Episcopal Church has any further jurisdiction over his ministry. We pray for all Anglicans in Pittsburgh as they consider their own relationship with The Episcopal Church in the coming weeks," said Archbishop Gregory Venables.

A statement from the Standing Committee of the Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh can be found at http://www.pitanglican.org/news/local/standingcommitteepastoral.

Letter to the Presiding Bishop

via email:

September 16, 2008



The House of Bishops of the Episcopal Church

The Episcopal Church Center

815 Second Avenue

New York, NY 10017



Dear Presiding Bishop Jefferts Schori and Members of the House of Bishops,



The Standing Committee and Bishop of the Diocese of Albany express our grave concern and hereby formally protest the planned deposition proceedings directed against Bishop Robert W. Duncan, called for by the Presiding Bishop in her Memorandum to the House of Bishops, dated September 12, 2008. We urge you in the strongest terms possible, not to proceed in this matter for the following reasons:



1) From a procedural and fairness standpoint, while it had been widely speculated that deposition proceedings would be brought against Bishop Duncan at the September HOB Meeting, the Presiding Bishop’s Memorandum to the House of Bishops, dated September 12, 2008, was the first official notification that such proceedings would in fact occur. There was no mention of deposition proceedings referenced in the draft agenda for the September HOB Meeting sent out on August 20, 2008. In the text of the agenda, it is stated that, “The main purpose of this meeting will be to reflect and deliberate together following the Lambeth Conference.” We believe that in a matter of such importance as the deposition of a bishop, every member of the House of Bishops should be notified well in advance of such actions, in order that every effort can be made by them to attend the proceedings. In accordance with the General Rules for Meetings in this House, Rule XIX on page 193 in the Rules of Order, House of Bishops, in order for any resolution to come before the House of Bishops at a special meeting the resolution must have been circulated 30 days in advance to all of the members, unless there is a two-thirds vote to allow the resolution. Should not the deposition of a bishop have, at a minimum, that same level of notification?



2) As acknowledged by the Presiding Bishop herself in the September 12th Memorandum, there have been significant differences of opinion expressed in regard to the interpretation of Canon IV.9 and the criteria that must be met as outlined in the canon. Specifically there is much debate centered around two major areas of concern: A) The required number of bishops needed to consent to the deposition of a bishop (whether it be a majority of all bishops in the House of Bishops eligible to vote or simply a majority of those present at the HOB meeting

in which the deposition proceedings occur); and B) Whether or not the inhibition of a bishop is a prerequisite to deposition. As you are well aware, the depositions of Bishop Schofield and Bishop Cox on March 12, 2008, were followed by an outcry by many within the Episcopal Church and the larger Anglican Communion. At question was the legality of the actions taken by the House of Bishops, particularly in regard to whether all the criteria outlined in Canon IV.9 were properly met and adhered to. While Presiding Bishop Jefferts Schori and her Chancellor David Booth Beers have both expressed their belief that they have properly interpreted the canons in regard to these matters, in a letter to the Presiding Bishop, dated March 27, 2008, the Standing Committee and Bishop of the Diocese of South Carolina, made a strong, well reasoned argument for an interpretation of Canon IV.9 which differs greatly from that held by the Presiding Bishop and her Chancellor. The Dioceses of Central Florida, Northern Indiana, Springfield and Western Louisiana, in statements published by their Standing Committees and or/Bishops in recent months, have raised similar concerns and interpretations of Canon IV.9 as those expressed by South Carolina. Due to these widely differing views and interpretations of Canon IV.9 and the extreme damage that can occur if misinterpreted, we call upon the House of Bishops to refrain from acting on this canon, until the House of Bishops is able to receive a legal interpretation of Canon IV.9 from a panel, consisting of a minimum of five canon lawyers/experts who are not involved in the proceedings against Bishop Duncan or any of the on going legal proceedings dealing with property disputes or parishes or dioceses leaving The Episcopal Church. While we appreciate the Presiding Bishop, her Chancellor and Bishop Stacy Sauls’ attempts to provide clarity in interpreting Canon IV.9, due to their current high level of involvement in legal proceedings throughout TEC that could be influenced by the outcome of the interpretation of Canon IV.9, we believe it is important to get an unbiased, outside interpretation of the canon, to prevent any appearance of a conflict of interest.



3) In defense or justification of the Presiding Bishop’s interpretation of Canon IV.9 in the depositions of Bishop Schofield, Bishop Cox and the pending deposition proceedings against Bishop Duncan, the depositions of Bishop Davies, the resigned bishop of Fort Worth in 1993, and Bishop Larrea, the Bishop of Ecuador Central in 2004 are cited as precedent, therefore paving the way for future depositions. The fact that no one apparently challenged the 1993 and 2004 depositions does not necessarily mean that the Presiding Bishop and her Chancellor have interpreted the canons correctly. If precedent is going to be used as justification for future actions, it is imperative that the canons are being properly interpreted and applied and that the process is agreed upon by the House of Bishops before action is taken. Again, the recent outcry by many over the believed failure to follow and apply the Canons properly in the depositions of Bishop Schofield and Bishop Cox, have only added to the growing division within TEC and the Anglican Communion.



4) In a letter to the Bishops of the Episcopal Church, dated August 24, 2008, Bishop Duncan stated, “The proper forum to determine whether I have violated constitution or canons would be a church trial, as I am a Bishop of this Church. But such a trial would have required due process and all the protections of the trial canons. The Course chosen…was an expedient course, requiring none of the justice, none of the expense, none of the rights of the accused, none of the lengthy timetable.” We concur with Bishop Duncan’s assessment that the proper forum to determine his guilt or innocence in regard to the charges that have been brought against him would be a church or ecclesiastical trial. The deposition of a bishop is an extremely serious matter as you well know. It is equivalent to the death penalty in regard to one’s ordained ministry. This is NO time to seek the most “expedient course” in determining one’s guilt or innocence. Bishop Duncan has dedicated his life to serving our Lord Jesus Christ and His Church. While we question the charges brought against him, if he is to be charged, it should be dealt with in an ecclesiastical trial with all the protections guaranteed in the trial canons. Anything less is doing Bishop Duncan and the Church a great injustice.



5) In their attempts to explain their interpretations of Canon IV.9, The Presiding Bishop, her Chancellor and Bishop Sauls make numerous references to the “intent” of a canon. In her September 12th Memorandum, Presiding Bishop Jefferts Schori stated, “…the General Convention in enacting this canon did not intend to give the three senior bishops a “veto” over the House’s right to determine whether or not a bishop who has been certified by the Review Committee as having abandoned the Communion of this Church should be deposed. Rather, that decision was intended to be made by the House.” First we would argue that is purely a judgment call on the part of the Presiding Bishop and her advisors. Others could well argue that the canonical stipulation that the majority vote of the three senior bishops was inserted to provide another level of discernment and to protect the House from having to deal with frivolous accusations. Second, after studying the history of Canon IV.9, a strong argument could be made that this canon was never intended to be used in the manner in which it was applied in the depositions of Bishop Schofield, Bishop Cox and the pending deposition proceedings against Bishop Duncan. It would seem that the intent of the canon is to deal with those bishops who not only leave the Episcopal Church, but also the Anglican Communion. That is clearly not the case with the three bishops just mentioned. While Bishop Schofield and Bishop Cox may have left TEC and in the case of Bishop Duncan it would appear he has plans to leave TEC, none of the three bishops have abandoned the Anglican Communion, but simply realigned with another province within the Anglican Communion. Because TEC is part of the Anglican Communion, it would seem that a charge of abandonment of Communion has no merit.



Despite the attempts of some to downplay the seriousness of the current situation in which tens of thousands of once loyal Episcopalians are leaving TEC, with no end in sight, the Episcopal Church is in a state of chaos. It is our belief that unless the current downward spiral is reversed, current and future charges of abandonment of communion will be a moot point. Within the not-too-distant future, if things continue as they currently are, there won’t be a communion to abandon. If the current on-going depositions of bishops and priests are intended to stop the mass exodus out of TEC, it isn’t working, but rather having the opposite effect. More and more clergy and laity are reaching the point that they can no longer accept or tolerate the recent theological innovations that have become so pervasive throughout much of The Episcopal Church’s leadership. The current attacks directed against the theologically conservative orthodox Christians within TEC are not scaring or intimidating them, but rather angering and emboldening them. With each new attack, more fuel is thrown on the fire. The depositions and lawsuits must stop. What type of example are we setting for our children and the rest of the world? What are we saying about how Episcopalians treat one another? Jesus commands us to love our enemy; to love our neighbor as we love ourselves; to love one another as He loves us. Clearly many in the Episcopal Church have not heard or listened to His command, when it comes to the way we relate to one another within TEC and the wider Anglican Communion.



The Standing Committee and Bishop of Albany call upon the House of Bishops, the House of Deputies and all involved in the current theological war to call a truce, enabling The Episcopal Church to refocus our time, energy and resources on the difficult but necessary process of figuring out how Christians who passionately hold what appear to be irreconcilable differences in the understanding and interpretation of Holy Scripture and its authority on our lives as well as issues of human sexuality, can move forward in building up the Kingdom of God by sharing the love and Good News of Jesus Christ with all who will receive it. For far too long we have been consumed by politically-charged agendas to the detriment of the Church and the building up of the Kingdom of God. May God give us the grace, the wisdom, the compassion, the humility we need to discern His will, moving forward in His Name to His honor and glory and to the benefit of His Church and people.



Faithfully in Christ,







The Reverend Lorraine M. Lyons

President, Standing Committee of the Diocese of Albany







The Right Reverend William H. Love

Bishop, Diocese of Albany

That's my code, my motto...

Participate in 40 Days for Life